[c-nsp] 65xx or 76xx for 'Distribution Layer'?

[Tim Durack]

Until recently the 65xx and 76xx were the same car, just a different
paint job. Now the BUs are "differentiating" the boxes.

65xx will be running the 12.2SX train. This is aimed more at the
enterprise/DC space. If you want modular IOS, and MPLS features
targeted more towards the Enterprise, this looks like the way to go.

76xx will be running the 12.2SR train. This looks to be aimed at the
SP space. Broadband aggregation support, all the fancy VPLS/H-VPLS
MPLS stuff.

Our last core upgrade got us OSPF as an IGP, with some limited areas.
I regret the mutiple area stuff. In future we will go OSPF with a
single area 0 for loopbacks/router-router networks, and BGP for
"customer" routes (read access switches.) BGP is additional
complexity, but we need it for globally reachable prefixes anyway. It
works for the Internet...

Tim:>

On 10/17/07, Drew Weaver <drew.weaver at thenap.com> wrote:
>                 We're going to be transitioning our networking from a simple 2 stage network:
>
> Internet -> router -> switch -> people
>
>                 To a more traditional style 3 stage network to allow more advanced services to happen between the edge and the aggregation layer:
>
> Internet -> Router -> Router/Switch -> Switch -> People
>
> I'm trying to get opinions on two things.
>
>
> 1)      From a speed/functionality standpoint would a 7600 or a 6500 be better in the Router/Switch (distribution) scenario?
>
> 2)      For our IGP (ospf) would it benefit us at all to have area 1 on the distribution layer and separate areas on each aggregation point? I've read both ways, that yes it does benefit you to do this and that no, it doesn't. (the idea is that the switches would each have their own area, and then the distribution layer would connect them all back to area 1).
>
> Any thoughts?
>
> The main reason for this switch is we want to be able to add things like IDS / DDOS mitigation, etc to our network and it seems like a wiser choice to aggregate all of the connections than to hang them off separately.
>
> Thanks for any opinions ;-)
>
> -Drew
> _______________________________________________
> 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/
>