[c-nsp] Sup32 TCAM limit

[Mark Tinka]

On Friday 27 June 2008 09:38:25 pm Phil Bedard wrote:

> They are a good fit for Enterprise IP/MPLS networks which
> may not have full routes, since they generally default to
> a firewall somewhere for that.  Also if you need
> something like a cheaper EoMPLS aggregation box they fit
> that need as well, or as relatively cheap P LSR.

Yep, if you're going BGP-free + a few OSPF routes in the 
core, you may re-use them as potential LSR's.

If you do go IPv6, however, you probably will need to turn 
on BGP in the core. I haven't worked with the SUP32, so I 
cannot claim to know how it performs with v6.

Cheers,

Mark.
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 835 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part.
URL: <https://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-nsp/attachments/20080628/8416ab93/attachment.bin>