[c-nsp] 6500/Supervisor SUP32 as Edge router

[Peter Salanki]

Robert,

The 6500 platform could fill your needs, but there are some caveats,

1) The sup32/sup720 will only do ingress/egress policing, no shaping  
and no hierarchical QoS (you need the expensive SIP linecards for that)
2) You will not be able to do uRPF on a SUP32-3B if you want a full  
DFZ in the router. You will need a SUP720-3BXL (or a possible future  
SUP32-3BXL) to be able to uRPF with full table.
3) Just as a reminder, vlan ids are shared over the entire switch. So  
if you assign a subinterface with a vlan tag, that vlan id can't be  
used on any other subinterface/SVI. (this does not apply for the SIP  
modules)

OSPF, BGP and ACLs are no problems.

I would prefer the 6500 over the 7304 if you don't need any fancy  
functions that the PXF gives you, as you get more throughput/$ with  
the 6500.

/Peter Salanki
Chief Network Engineer
Bahnhof AB (AS8473)
Stockholm, Sweden

On Mar 27, 2006, at 12:26 AM, Robert Hass wrote:

> Hi,
> Is good idea to use 6500+SUP32 as Edge router terminating about 40-50
> customers VLANs and doing on these VLANs traffic-policing (CAR) ? I'm
> not familiar with limitations on 6500 regarding QoS and queueing.
>
> VLANs will be connected via GE dot1q from 6 access switches (Catalyst
> 2960), each customer VLAN need to be policed from 2Mb/s upto 140Mb/s
> (aggregate traffic is now 600Mb/s). On few VLANs we're using
> policy-based-routing. Currently we're using 7200/NPE-G1 but CPU usage
> is now on 80-90%... Traffic is incrasing about 50Mb/s each month.
> I need policing/shaping, OSPF, BGP, PBR, ACLs and uRPF.
>
> Maybe better idea is go to 7304/NSE-100 (GPL 24k USD) or Juniper M7i
> with 2xGE (GPL 30k USD).
>
> Thanks for help.
> Robert
> _______________________________________________
> 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/