[c-nsp] 6500 vs Packeteer

[Andrew Alston]

Hi,

We actually recently made the decision to put down Cisco SCE 2020 for 
traffic shaping purposes.  Their throughput is far higher than the 
packeteers and their layer 7 classification was found to be adequate.  
These boxes ship with a tyco branded optical bypass unit that causes a 
bypass of the shaper should the shaper fail, and while this removes the 
shaping being done it does prevent the single point of failure referred 
to.  I must however warn anyone considering this device, their setup is 
*FAR* more complex than that of a packeteer, and while it works 
beautifully once its installed and modifying configurations etc is 
relatively easy once you have the base done, getting the thing to that 
point was nothing short of a nightmare. 

Thanks

Andrew Alston
TENET - Chief Technology Officer

Aivars wrote:
> With a dedicated shaper you will archive layer 7
> application recognition and user based traffic shaping inbound and
> outbound. SUP720 compared to a dedicated box will do just a very basic
> things sometimes sacrificing other functions (microflow policing
> and netflow). You could have 2 shapers if you require higher
> availability. Also optical bypass comes as an option for most vendors.
>
> I also guess that some good news from Cisco in shaping area are
> comming. Check with your Cisco partner.
>
> Aivars
>
> Tuesday, February 19, 2008, 7:20:44 PM, you wrote:
>
> MW> Anyone have any input on the pros & cons of 6500 QoS vs Packeteer or
> MW> other similar appliance?  Specifically I am referring to Sup720-3CXL QoS
> MW> capabilities...  Basically my concern is having an appliance as single
> MW> point of failure.  As I increase redundancy in the network
> MW> infrastructure it would be nice if I can achieve desired
> MW> QoS/rate-limiting using the switches themselves without additional gear.
> MW> At the same time I believe I will give up some deep packet inspection
> MW> capability and a loss of granularity so to speak in identifying
> MW> undesirable traffic...
>
> MW>  
>
> MW> Bill Murphy
> MW> Senior Network Analyst
> MW> University of Texas Health Science Center - Houston
>
>
>
> MW>  
>
> MW> _______________________________________________
> MW> cisco-nsp mailing list  cisco-nsp at puck.nether.net
> MW> https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nsp
> MW> archive at http://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-nsp/
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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/
>