[c-nsp] channelized OC-12 for aggregation

[Stephen Cobb]

FYI, the 12000 series channelized oc12 line cards are supported by IOS XR as
well, and used chassis+PRP-2+oc12 hardware should be well below the cost of
a used 7600+sup720+sip+spa combo...

http://www.cisco.com/en/US/docs/routers/xr12000/software/xr12k_r3.9/general/release/notes/reln_391xr12k.html

sc

On Thu, May 13, 2010 at 10:55 AM, Rob Shakir <rjs at eng.gxn.net> wrote:

> Hi Geoff,
>
> A couple of comments - we're currently running a bunch of 7600 with a bunch
> of chSTM-1 SPAs in SIP-200 for n*DS0 -> DS-3 aggregation, so hopefully some
> of our experiences might be of interest.
>
> We've actually found the 7600 with SIPs to be really reliable boxes, after
> a few issues in early SRC, with newer software, we haven't had any problems
> with these boxes. We're doing HDLC, some frame-relay legacy support, and
> MLPPP across E1 or STM-1 bearers. We've got a set of issues with the way
> that some alarms are parsed, which I've explained below, but in general
> we're pretty happy with these 7600s! It's worth mentioning too that the
> SIP-200 is relatively good at providing some relatively useful features, so
> for example, doing LLQ inside a customer E1 is something that we've
> standardised on this platform.
>
> I'm not sure that I can provide a good comparison against the ASR, but I
> don't think that the GSR option sounds cost effective in general. You will
> probably be aware that the 12000 series GSRs are EoS, which means that you
> will find that getting upgraded code (if you bought used hardware) is not
> possible. In addition, it is worth checking that 12.0(32)S(Y)? or 12.0(33)S
> support the features that you need.
>
> On 13 May 2010, at 17:12, Geoffrey Pendery wrote:
> > So my real questions :
> > 1.  Anybody have experience with this particular SPA?  Good/bad?
>
> Whilst not specifically this SPA - but the choc3/stm-1 variant of it, at
> least in the SDH world, there are ongoing issues with the parsing of the POH
> for a VC-12 channel. Cisco did not implement full parsing of the V5 byte, so
> therefore they are able to recognise only AIS for a specific VC-12. This is
> somewhat inconvenient when your provider doesn't send AIS on unequipped
> channels, and hence (correctly) sends LPUNEQ alarms.
>
> This is really inconvenient for us, since it causes issues with parsing of
> alarms that were available on older CHSTM-1 hardware. I am not sure whether
> this would have been the same for the choc-12/stm-4 card, but it might be
> worth checking if this is something that you're going to rely on.
>
> > 2.  If we went with 7600, we'd have to switch to SRD from SXH - what
> > sort of nasty surprises should I expect there?
>
> We're much happier with SRD than we are with SXH as a train. Our target
> release for 7600s at the moment is SRD4, and we haven't found anything
> that's forced us to move away from it (yet!).
>
> Kind regards,
> Rob
>
> --
> Rob Shakir                      <rjs at eng.gxn.net>
> Network Development Engineer    GX Networks/Vialtus Solutions
> ddi: +44208 587 6077            mob: +44797 155 4098
> pgp: 0xc07e6deb                 nic-hdl: RJS-RIPE
>
> This email is subject to: http://www.vialtus.com/disclaimer.html
>
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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/
>



-- 
Stephen F. Cobb • Senior Sales Engineer
CCNA/CCDA/DCNID/ATSP
Telecoast Communications, LLC • Santa Barbara, CA
o 877.677.1182 x272 • c 760.807.0570 • f 805.618.1610
aim/yahoo telecoaststephen