[c-nsp] Is the 6704 really as terrible as everyone says?

[Edward Salonia]

As others have already said, I wouldn't go so far as to call them the worst line cards ever made. 

That said, if your going to bursting a lot of traffic or getting up to the higher end of 10g you may be better off using a 6708 instead. You can take a look at the following link for a comparison. Note the 200mb per port buffers instead of 16.

http://www.cisco.com/en/US/solutions/collateral/ns340/ns517/ns224/ns668/net_business_benefit0900aecd805348f3.html

Also, while a 6708 is oversubscribed 2:1, you can use the global config command '[no] hw-module slot x oversubscription' to administratively shut down ports 3, 4, 7, and 8 so you effectively turn it into a 6704 with the bigger buffers as well as not being oversubscribed anymore. This way it will do a full 40g of local switching if you need that.

- Ed
-----Original Message-----
From: Drew Weaver <drew.weaver at thenap.com>
Sender: cisco-nsp-bounces at puck.nether.net
Date: Thu, 2 Dec 2010 10:41:29 
To: cisco-nsp<cisco-nsp at puck.nether.net>
Subject: [c-nsp] Is the 6704 really as terrible as everyone says?

I've read several posts on here that lead me to believe that the WS-6704-10G is essentially the worst linecard ever produced.

The problem is, I only need 2 ports of 10G and just to replace 2x1Gbps uplinks that almost never get anywhere near their line rate capacity.

If they are really, really, awful. I will probably just end up getting a 6708 for this particular switch, but I would rather not considering the huge price difference.

Currently I am using the 1G ports off of the Sup720 as the uplink, and I hear those have awful buffers as well.

So when upgrading from the ports on the Sup720 to a 6704, is that still a bad move?

thanks,
-Drew


_______________________________________________
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/