[c-nsp] Where to use the ES20 over the 6704/8

[Munroe, James (DSS/MAS)]

The points that come to mind:
 
ES20 offers:
1.  H-QoS support
2.  H-VPLS support (ES must connect upstream and downstream VPLS links)
3.  VPLS support (ES must connect upstream and downstream VPLS links)
4.  DFC included...
 

________________________________

From: Justin Shore [mailto:justin at justinshore.com]
Sent: Fri 21/09/2007 1:42 PM
To: 'Cisco-nsp'
Subject: [c-nsp] Where to use the ES20 over the 6704/8



We've talked about this before I want to inquire about it again.  When
would one use the ES20 over the 6704/8?  My understanding is that the ES
line is a more dense substitute for advanced SPA ports.  These advanced
features are useful for customer-facing interfaces.  Would that be a
fair assessment?

I'm running MPLS across my existing 7600 core.  I'm adding 3 7609
chassis as a distribution layer.  10G is needed to support our FTTx
roll-out among other things.  I'm looking at 6704/8s for chassis to
chassis connections and ES20s (soon to be ES40s) for customer-facing
GigE or 10G interfaces if we plan on using MPLS capabilities for those
customers.  We're running MPLS across our core now and will extend it to
encompass the distribution layer as well.  We'll be carrying mcast
across the network for IPTV, though I'm not sure if we'll be utilizing
mvpn at this time.  MPLS-TE w/ FRR & BFD will be implemented as well.
IS-IS is the IGP.  We have to run the SR train for CALEA support.

Does any of that make one lean towards the ES series over the 67xx
series blades in either the backbone connections or the customer-facing
connections?  The price difference is the biggest con at this point
unless there's a technical reason to choose one over the other.

Thanks
  Justin