[c-nsp] 6500 w/sup32 as BGP edge router?

Thu Feb 3 05:44:49 EST 2005

Tim,

I was told that there is no roadmap for sup32 with IOS.
Is this information correct?

Thanks in advance,
Jeff

-----Original Message-----
From: Tim Stevenson [mailto:tstevens at cisco.com]
Sent: Wednesday, February 02, 2005 5:35 PM
To: Rodney Dunn; Tantsura, Jeff
Cc: Rutger Bevaart; cisco-nsp at puck.nether.net
Subject: Re: [c-nsp] 6500 w/sup32 as BGP edge router?

At 07:17 AM 2/2/2005, Rodney Dunn commented:
>If it were me I'd not go with a software forwarding
>platform if I was concerned about large volumes
>od DDOS traffic that needed to be evaluated
>and dropped.

Sup32 is not a software forwarding platform.

>  I'd look at something with some
>hardware dropping capability.
>
>7304/NSE100, 76xx(sup720), or GSR.

Given the correct software, Sup32 will have all the same CPU rate
limiters
as sup720, these are a function of the PFC3B, which sup32 comes with by
default.

That said, the software roadmap is such that we won't have L3 capability
on
this sup at FCS, so hybrid & later native support will be required to
get
the L3 functionality & the L3 CPU rate limiters (L2 RLs supported at
FCS).

>The sup720 combination has a lot more functionality
>in regards to hardware rate limiters to help
>you protect the RP for various traffic types and
>ACL's.

The MSFC3 CPU is slightly higher horsepower than MSFC2A of sup32 & has
more
DRAM by default; and of course, the fabric capacity and thus potential
performance is MUCH higher for sup720 vs sup32. For relatively low-speed

WAN links and BGP peering, sup32 should be adequate.

>If you connection links are small and the software
>forwarding CPU is fast enough you can do things
>like CoPP to protect the CPU but even with that
>if you get high enough rates you can overrun the
>CPU.  It all depends on the deployment.

Again, this is a h/w forwarding sup, it uses FIB/ADJ model just like
sup720. CoPP will be supported in sup32 when native s/w is available. In

terms of BGP peering, when L3 s/w is available, this will be possible &
supported, the RP is MSFC2a, which is virtually identical to MSFC2 on
sup2.

In any case, if you need to do peering today, sup720 is the best option.

Tim

>Rodney
>
>On Wed, Feb 02, 2005 at 02:33:14PM +0100, Tantsura, Jeff wrote:
> >
> > Rutger,
> >
> > According to Cisco sup32 will at least in the begin come with CATOS
> > only, so no BGP/fancy things.
> > I'd go for 7200 GE option.
> >
> > Jeff
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: cisco-nsp-bounces at puck.nether.net
> > [mailto:cisco-nsp-bounces at puck.nether.net] On Behalf Of Rutger
Bevaart
> > Sent: Wednesday, February 02, 2005 1:23 PM
> > To: cisco-nsp at puck.nether.net
> > Subject: [c-nsp] 6500 w/sup32 as BGP edge router?
> >
> >
> > hello list,
> >
> > i'm currently evaluating possibilities for an edge router with the
> > following requirements,
> >
> > - able to handle at least three full BGP4 feeds (~160K routes);
> > - future proof to implement IPv6 in the coming two years, including
full
> > feeds;
> > - relative low bandwidth requirements (10 - 40Mbps);
> > - two Gbit ethernet ports to local colo and server LAN(s);
> > - most connections will be ethernet, possibly one or two STM1 / OC3;
> > - resistent against DDoS attacks - able to handle a few hundred
Mbits of
> > DDoS traffic until we can resolve it with upstream peers;
> > - low cost;
> >
> > the options i've covered so far include,
> >
> > - 7204VXR / 7206VXR using NPE400 or NPE-GE;
> > - 7301 or 7304-NSR;
> > - 6503 with Sup32;
> >
> > right now i have the feeling that the 6500 route would cost-wise be
a
> > very
> > smart choice. the sup32 offers 15Mpps (cisco spec) that should cover
the
> > DDos part. the embedded 8 gbit ethernet ports come in handy for the
> > upstreams and downstream connections. adding a flexwan slot will
bring
> > in
> > the STM1 connectivity.
> >
> > on the other hand, it is no a pure routing platform such as a 7304
with
> > NSE (that does 3.5Mpps according to cisco).
> >
> > this has probably been discussed to death (pardon my ignorance) but
how
> > would the 6503 scenario stand against the general routing platforms
such
> > as the 7304?
> >
> > regards
> > Rutger Bevaart
> >
> > URL:
> >
http://www.cisco.com/en/US/products/hw/modules/ps2797/products_data_shee
> > t0900aecd801c5cab.html
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > cisco-nsp mailing list  cisco-nsp at puck.nether.net
> > https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nsp
> > archive at http://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-nsp/
> >
> > This message contains information that may be privileged or
> confidential and is the property of the Capgemini Group. It is
intended
> only for the person to whom it is addressed. If you are not the
intended
> recipient,  you are not authorized to read, print, retain, copy,
> disseminate,  distribute, or use this message or any part thereof. If
you
> receive this  message in error, please notify the sender immediately
and
> delete all  copies of this message.
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > cisco-nsp mailing list  cisco-nsp at puck.nether.net
> > https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nsp
> > archive at http://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-nsp/
>_______________________________________________
>cisco-nsp mailing list  cisco-nsp at puck.nether.net
>https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nsp
>archive at http://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-nsp/

Tim Stevenson, tstevens at cisco.com
Routing & Switching CCIE #5561
Technical Marketing Engineer, Catalyst 6500
Cisco Systems, http://www.cisco.com
IP Phone: 408-526-6759
********************************************************
The contents of this message may be *Cisco Confidential*
and are intended for the specified recipients only.

This message contains information that may be privileged or confidential and is the property of the Capgemini Group. It is intended only for the person to whom it is addressed. If you are not the intended recipient,  you are not authorized to read, print, retain, copy, disseminate,  distribute, or use this message or any part thereof. If you receive this  message in error, please notify the sender immediately and delete all  copies of this message.