[c-nsp] Cisco 7304 as a Border router

[McCallum, Robert]

Yep not a problem running with the 7304's mate.  However, (yes there is a
however).  DO NOT TOUCH THE NPE-G100 with a BARGE POLE.  It's a 7200 in
disguise.  Opt for the NSE-100.  Everything you are looking to do shall be
done in PXF when using the NSE-100.  The NSE-100 can shift ~4or5 gigs in
total across its backplane whereas the NPE-G100 can shift ~(too embarressed
to say in a public forum + Cisco would send round the heavies).  

Robert McCallum 
CCIE #8757 R&S


> -----Original Message-----
> From: Robert Blayzor [mailto:rblayzor at inoc.net] 
> Sent: 14 January 2005 15:30
> To: cisco-nsp at puck.nether.net
> Subject: [c-nsp] Cisco 7304 as a Border router
> 
> 
> We are exploring purchasing a couple of new border routers for our 
> network.  We've explored the 7600's but they seem to be way 
> overkill for 
> what we want to do.
> 
> Day one we will probably use them to aggregate a few DS3/OC3 
> connections 
> to upstreams with full BGP tables, etc.  We also want to use them for 
> some aggregated Ethernet connections over Gig-E...
> 
> We've looked at the pluses and minuses of the NSE100 vs the G100.  It 
> seems the G100's processing power and DRAM capacity is a 
> better fit for 
> us, especially for the routing tables.
> 
> I'm looking for anyones comments or experiences with using 
> 7300's in a 
> border router deployment and if it's meeting your needs.  I'm 
> curious as 
> to what type and how much traffic you are pushing through it.
> 
> -- 
> Robert Blayzor, BOFH
> INOC, LLC
> rblayzor\@(inoc.net|gmail.com)
> PGP: http://www.inoc.net/~dev/
> Key fingerprint = 1E02 DABE F989 BC03 3DF5  0E93 8D02 9D0B CB1A A7B0
> 
> Design: The activity of preparing for a design review. 
> _______________________________________________
> 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/
>