[c-nsp] Re: cat6000 6548 vs 6148 card

[Brad Bonin]

Assuming that all other modules will never use the 32G bus (all others have DFC's), then go with the 6148, which provides you up to
15Mpps across the 32Gbus.  Plenty of BW and PPS for just one card.

Besides, you can use your cost savings to upgrade from Sup720 to 3B or 3BXL:-)

brad
-----Original Message-----
From: cisco-nsp-bounces at puck.nether.net [mailto:cisco-nsp-bounces at puck.nether.net] On Behalf Of lee.e.rian at census.gov
Sent: Tuesday, January 18, 2005 10:10 AM
To: cisco-nsp at puck.nether.net
Subject: [c-nsp] cat6000 6548 vs 6148 card

Hi All,

I've been following the various threads about the cat6000 architecture & have had all my questions answered (thanks all :-) except
one.  If you're going to have only one power over ethernet card to support IP phones, is it worthwhile to get the 6548 card instead
of the 6148 card?

We're looking at the 6748+DFC3 cards for servers.  But we also have to support some cisco IP phones and the 6748 doesn't do POE so
it looks like we've got a choices of either the WS-X6548-GE-45AF or WS-X6148-GE-45AF card.  As far as I can tell, the only
difference between the cards is the 8Gb connection to the SFC.  Both cards have a max frame size of 1518 bytes, same size port
buffers, same 8:1 bandwidth over-subscription and neither can have a DFC daughter card.  Considering that every other card in the
switch will be a fabric-enabled card with a DFC3, is there any advantage to having a WS-X6548-GE-45AF instead of a WS-X6148-GE-45AF
card?

Thanks,
Lee

_______________________________________________
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/