[c-nsp] 7200s and fastethernet aggregator ?

[Rodney Dunn]

On Wed, Mar 28, 2007 at 01:11:42PM +0100, Kristofer Sigurdsson wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> 2007/3/28, Rodney Dunn <rodney at cisco.com>:
> >
> >Before a couple of months ago I had to agree with you Kristo.
> >
> >But maybe not now. ;)
> >
> >I just had to work an issue with overruns on the NPE-G100 Gig ports
> >ona  7304 because it couldn't keep up.
> 
> 
> 
> I actually didn't comment on the 7304's, as I don't have any experience on
> those.  Does this also apply on the NPE-G2, perhaps?  In my experience, the
> NPE-G1 works very well, I haven't worked with G2 yet.

The G1 and G2 on the 72xx are all software forwarding engines with no hw
forwarding. The G2 can do fast rates but when you start adding a bunch
of features it will slow down oveall PPS numbers. If the PXF complex
in the NSE-150 can handle your features it can do them at line rate
up the forwarding capacity of the hardware engine. I *think* it's 4 Mpps
or so with the NSE-150.

> 
> I've done up to 600-700 Mbit/s on NPE-G1 (7301), without any significant
> problems (nasty load, though, don't recommend it).

;) The performance is usually more of a factor of pps numbers so that
rate with large packet sizes might not be that much. At 64k byte voice
packets it might be on the higher side.

> 
> 
> The customer upgraded to the NSE-150 and in the lab it did line
> >rate GIG with no issues. The RP CPU in the case you need to punt
> >is much much faster. I need to go back and check the specs.
> >
> >This customer was doing dual GIG links to the core and an OC12 on the
> >handoff to the WAN. It was filling up the WAN and the box never even
> >noticed. He was using the 1xOC12 SPA.
> >
> >Something to consider....
> 
> 
> 
> Definitely.  Thanks for the tip.
> 
> -Kristo