[c-nsp] Pile on the 6509 noob

[Scott McGrath]

Personally,

The 6509 was never optimal for WAN usage it's a excellent ethernet 
router,   What we have
done is use a 7206 or similar router for WAN service and connected it to 
the 65xx via ethernet
one this isolates your WAN circuits so in the event Zeus tosses a 
thunderbolt your way you blow
up an inexpensive router (relatively) and the 65xx is protected due to 
the only connection
being optical (assuming GE interfaces here).

Also the 72xx has many WAN specific features in IOS which are not in the 
65xx's code train
or were not the last time I actively looked.

- Scott

Mark Tinka wrote:
> On Friday 25 September 2009 02:10:06 am CJ wrote:
>
>   
>> Finally, if I solved this issue, I'm wondering about the
>> relative wisdom of using the FlexWAN card.  I want to put
>> a PA-2DS3 in it and also a PA-MC-T3. Is this an
>> enlightened practice?
>>     
>
> We've always been against trying to turn an Ethernet box 
> into a TDM/SONET/SDH device, as it's never cheap considering 
> how much bandwidth you're losing per slot relative to the 
> investment in adding non-Ethernet support as well as the 
> kind of bandwidth you'd be getting out of it.
>
> It's the same thing Juniper did with their MX-FPC carrier 
> cards, adding support for SONET/SDH PIC's in the MX-series 
> routers. I'd still find it cheaper to buy a smaller box that 
> talks Ethernet and non-Ethernet fairly equally from an 
> overall cost/benefit-perspective.
>
> But that's just us :-)... I'm sure a number of networks in 
> the wild find this feature quite useful, which is why the 
> vendors continue to find ways to provide support for it.
>
> Cheers,
>
> Mark.
>