[c-nsp] 7604/sup32

[Peter Rathlev]

On Tue, 2008-01-08 at 07:45 -0800, Mark Kent wrote:
> So, I'm looking at the cisco web pages and I see the 7600 is pushed
>  big-time as a service provider edge device, and yet I see that the
>  sup32-3b has a 300Mhz processor, and so it is not much faster than an
>  NPE-300 (262Mhz).
> 
> I stopped taking full routes on NPE-300 equipment a couple of years
>  ago, moving to an npe-g1.   So, what's the scoop with the
>  7600/sup32-3b?    It seems like a step back to me, other than the 8
>  built-in gigE ports.

The 7600 does hardware forwarding of most traffic (depends), and thus
does not use the processor for that. It's the PFC/DFC that does the
forwarding. That's an advantage. :-)

> I'm looking at an application where the box would push a total of about
>  1Gbs over two gigE upstreams.  It would have two gigE internal
>  neighbors, each with full bgp routes... so four full tables. I'm
>  concerned about the issue of traceroutes looking bad as they pass
>  through the box (which confuses EndUsers), due to the cpu load from
>  the bgp scanner.

On Tue, 2008-01-08 at 12:14 -0500, Jared Mauch wrote:
> Simple answer: Sup32 is not viable for full bgp tables anymore.  Enjoy
> it as a l2 device that can't do 10GE!

With 512MB memory, it can't take a full table? The world is moving fast
I guess. :-)

Anyway, you could adjust walker intervals etc. and maybe cope with the
tardy processor, but it's probably not a good idea.

Regards,
Peter