[c-nsp] Re: Cisco 7600 vs Juniper M7i

[Church, Chuck]

Thanks, Ian.  I was thinking more about the Flexwans, which are really a
close relative of the VIP, right?  I haven't had any experience with the
OSMs.  Those use the Sup's PFC for forwarding, even if source and dest
is 2 different ints/subints on the same OSM?  If so, I retract my
previous statement!  That would seem to address the 'VIP running at 99%'
issue we sometimes see under DOS'es.   The new SIP-200 had a PPS rating
associated with it, I'm assuming that one doesn't use the PFC?

Chuck Church
Lead Design Engineer
CCIE #8776, MCNE, MCSE
Netco Government Services - Design & Implementation
1210 N. Parker Rd.
Greenville, SC 29609
Home office: 864-335-9473
Cell: 703-819-3495
cchurch at netcogov.com
PGP key: http://pgp.mit.edu:11371/pks/lookup?op=get&search=0x4371A48D


-----Original Message-----
From: Ian Cox [mailto:icox at cisco.com] 
Sent: Thursday, June 02, 2005 12:56 PM
To: Simon Leinen; Church, Chuck
Cc: cisco-nsp at puck.nether.net
Subject: Re: [c-nsp] Re: Cisco 7600 vs Juniper M7i

At 04:54 PM 6/2/2005 +0200, Simon Leinen wrote:
>Church, Chuck writes:
> > Is this really a fair fight though?  You're comparing a router
> > against a high-end layer 3 switch on just Ethernet.  Everything they
> > tested was things the 7600 can do on the PFC.
>
>Note that PFC3B/PFC3B-XL can do many things (IPv4/IPv6 uni/multicast,
>MPLS, various forms of tunnel encapsulations, IPv4/IPv6 Netflow (they
>can only export IPv4 flows for now though), many kinds of QoS)...
>
> > I'd expect the Cisco to destroy the Juniper on that.  Now if they'd
> > tested OC-x interfaces, that'd have been a totally different story,
> > I bet.
>
>We have a few OC-12c and OC-48c POS interfaces (OSMs) on the 7600, and
>they perform fine.  They are quite expensive though, the port density
>isn't that impressive, and they cannot use the Sup720 switching fabric
>(but the 32 Gbps legacy bus supports quite a few of them).  Forwarding
>is done by the PFC even for these interfaces.

The OSMs do use the Sup720 switch fabric to move packets between line 
cards, running at 8Gbps. They use the bus just to pass the packet 
headers to the PFCx to make the forwarding decision.

wodonga#sh mod
Mod Ports Card Type                              Model
Serial No.
--- ----- -------------------------------------- ------------------
-----------
   1    4  2-port CHOC-12/DS0 
SI                  OSM-2CHOC12/T1-SI  SAD0625024U
   2   24  CEF720 24 port 1000mb 
SFP              WS-X6724-SFP       SAL08394EXH
   3    4  2-port OC-12c ATM MM+                  OSM-2OC12-ATM-MM
   4    0  4-subslot SPA Interface 
Processor-200  7600-SIP-200       JAB080504XZ
   5    2  Supervisor Engine 720 
(Active)         WS-SUP720-BASE     SAD07170004
   7    4  2-port OC-48c POS 
SM                   OSM-2OC48/1DPT-SS  SAD060202HU
   8    4  1-port OC-48c POS 
SM                   OSM-1OC48-POS-SS   SAD0537012R
   9   16  SFM-capable 16 port 1000mb 
GBIC        WS-X6516-GBIC      SAD044908G9

wodonga#sh fabric status all
  slot    channel      speed    module               fabric
                                status               status
     1          0         8G        OK                   OK
     2          0        20G        OK                   OK
     3          0         8G        OK                   OK
     4          0        20G        OK                   OK
     5          0        20G        OK                   OK
     7          0         8G        OK                   OK
     8          0         8G        OK                   OK
     9          0         8G        OK                   OK




>The SPA/SIP modules that Simon mentioned should improve choice of
>ports, port density, and performance (I think these carrier cards *do*
>have fabric attachments).

The Enhanced FlexWAN, all OSMs, 7600-SIP-200, 7600-SIP-400 all have 
fabric connections.


Ian

>--
>Simon.
>
>_______________________________________________
>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/