[c-nsp] 2851 throughput / guidance

[Brian Desmond]

You can get quasi L3 out of the HWC-4FE. You can't do IPs on the interfaces but you can take a route something like this with SVIs:

Int vla 2
Ip addr 192.168.2.1 255.255.255.0

Int vla 3
Ip addr 192.168.3.1 255.255.255.0

Int vla 4
Ip addr 192.168.4.1 255.255.255.0

Int vla 5
Ip addr 192.168.5.1 255.255.255.0

Int fa0/0/1
Sw acc vla 2

Int fa0/0/1
Sw acc vla 3

Int fa0/0/1
Sw acc vla 4

Int fa0/0/1
Sw acc vla 5

Thanks,
Brian Desmond
brian at briandesmond.com

c - 312.731.3132

> -----Original Message-----
> From: cisco-nsp-bounces at puck.nether.net [mailto:cisco-nsp-
> bounces at puck.nether.net] On Behalf Of Justin Shore
> Sent: Tuesday, February 27, 2007 8:28 PM
> To: Alex Campbell
> Cc: cisco-nsp at puck.nether.net
> Subject: Re: [c-nsp] 2851 throughput / guidance
>
> First off skip the Advanced Security code and get Advanced IP.
> Advanced
> IP has everything Advanced Security does and more.  Not doing it now
> will likely be a pain in the future.
>
> http://www.cisco.com/en/US/partner/products/sw/iosswrel/ps5460/index.ht
> ml
>
> The 2851 doesn't gain you much over the 2821 (except price) if this
> really is a short-term solution.  The 2851 does give you support for
> additional MNE modules, particularly the ones with StackWise
> interfaces.
>   You also get another 25Mbps out of it but hopefully you'll be well on
> your way to a better solution by then:
>
> http://www.cisco.com/warp/public/765/tools/quickreference/routerperform
> ance.pdf
>
> You could look at a decommissioned 7500 if you don't mind paying more
> for a SmartNet.
>
> The HWIC-1FE gives you an additional L3 interface as compared to the
> HWIC-4ESW which gives you 4 L2 interfaces if memory serves me correctly
> (but just in case).
>
> http://www.cisco.com/en/US/products/hw/modules/ps2641/products_module_i
> nstallation_guide_chapter09186a008068dde6.html
> http://www.cisco.com/en/US/products/ps5853/products_data_sheet0900aecd8
> 016bf0b.html
>
> I'm actually faced with a similar problem.  I'm involved with a new
> data
> center that originally had 6524s and 4948s.  That got scaled back to
> 2821s and 3560Gs.  My projected life of these devices (the routers at
> least) is around 6 months, tops.  However by then the experiment should
> have proven itself and we can move on to a better solution that
> hopefully will be a 6509-13 which will greatly help and simplify the
> overall design.
>
> Justin
>
>
> Alex Campbell wrote:
> > Does anyone have any advice/experiences they could share with running
> > Cisco 2851s as border routers on a small hosting network?
> >
> > We're looking at 2851s with 768MB DRAM and Advanced Security
> featureset.
> > We would be running two on our border, each taking a full internet
> > routing table from a different upstream and some IX prefixes.
> >
> > We won't be doing QoS, voice, VPNs etc, but we will have the stateful
> > firewall features turned on as well as reasonably long ACLs.
> >
> > About 95% of the traffic through the devices will be HTTP and HTTPS,
> > probably in the 10mbps - 30mbps range.  The 2851s wouldn't be a
> really
> > long term solution, and once we start to hit the 70-90mbps range we
> > would be ready to replace them with something much bigger.
> >
> > Also, what are the real life advantages/disadvantages with using the
> > HWIC-4ESW in this situation instead of the frighteningly expensive
> > HWIC-1FEs?
> >
> > The 2851 isn't my ideal solution but the 38xxs are too pricey.  A
> refurb
> > 7204 with NPE-400 is only slightly more expensive to purchase than a
> new
> > 2851, but Smartnet on it is 5x more expensive.  I'd love to go with a
> > Juniper J-4350-JB which is the same price as the 2851 and is much
> better
> > value, but it might be hard locally to find capable Juniper people.
> Any
> > other suggestions would be most welcome.
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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/