[c-nsp] is L2TPv3 right for me?

[Yan Filyurin]

I would agree with that and I was testing it some time ago and tests involved ISRs, 7206-G1 and 10720 and 10720 was the only device that could do this and even Cisco was surprised.  L2TPv3 is not supported in hardware of most devices and in case of 10720 it just had enough processing power. With larger frames, the throughput would increase as, there would less packets to encapsulate, but I never saw with 1400 byte frames anything that went beyond 100 Mbps. EoMPLS might be a better choice (still not sure about G1) and they might just bring L2TPv3 to ASR one day, if they unless they already did. 




________________________________
From: Sebastian Wiesinger <cisco-nsp at ml.karotte.org>
To: cisco-nsp at puck.nether.net
Sent: Sun, November 1, 2009 3:16:09 PM
Subject: Re: [c-nsp] is L2TPv3 right for me?

* Church, Charles <cchurc05 at harris.com> [2009-10-31 18:59]:
> Hey all,
> 
>     destinations are sent across, etc)...  The link provided will
>     be gigabit, but with encryption overhead, probably need at
>     most 900 mbit throughput, mostly using full-size frames as
>     traffic will be mostly migration data.  I've got a couple
>     7206s available with NPE-G1.  I'm thinking that will work.
>     Any thoughts?

I don't have numbers at the moment but IRRC NPE-G1 can't handle
anything near 900MBit/s of L2TPv3 traffic..

Regards,

Sebastian

-- 
New GPG Key: 0x93A0B9CE (F4F6 B1A3 866B 26E9 450A  9D82 58A2 D94A 93A0 B9CE)
Old GPG Key-ID: 0x76B79F20 (0x1B6034F476B79F20)
'Are you Death?' ... IT'S THE SCYTHE, ISN'T IT? PEOPLE ALWAYS NOTICE THE SCYTHE.
            -- Terry Pratchett, The Fifth Elephant
_______________________________________________
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/