[c-nsp] 7513 T3 Card Question

[Pete Templin]

David Coulson wrote:

> So, a 7206 is considerable more dense than a 7513. That said, 6 7206s 
> with NPE-G1s are far more expensive than a 7513 with something that will 
> do Gigabit. That said, then you have to eat far more gigabit switch 
> ports, plus you have increased management - Power utilization is pretty 
> much the same (280Wx6 vs 1400W).

Step back and analyze: do you really need NPE-G1 (a device rated around 
1 million pps, so we'll figure 100kpps real-world) to handle ~6-8kpps? 
I'm showing about 4kpps on 4xCT3.  Consider NPE-225, and you'll see the 
price drop significantly.  Plus, you won't need Gig uplinks...but it may 
impact your scalability calculations.

> On the other hand, one of the big reasons we started using 7513 rather 
> than 7206 was the availability of redundant processors.

Redundant processors means your outage time shrinks from 360 seconds to 
~45 seconds, on the rare occasion there's a processor outage.  However, 
you gain outage time whenever a processor "fakes" an outage, and the 
spare RSP takes over.

Using 6x7206 in the space of 1x7513 means 12xCT3 are impacted, not 
36xCT3, and your other 64xCT3 are undisturbed.  That can be a good 
thing.  Given the simplicity of the code in a 7200 (no need for any dCEF 
code, no need to accommodate switching vectors for non-dCEF cards, 
etc.), you're getting a more stable platform in the 7206 than the 7513.

Nutshell: I want 7206s (NPE-225, 2xOC3 uplinks, 4xPA-MC-2T3) for my 
ongoing CT3 deployments.

pt