[c-nsp] ISR G2 performance

Stephen Stack stephen.stack at strencom.net
Tue Sep 28 04:27:41 EDT 2010


Quite right I think. 

Cisco are very good at documenting Configuration scenarios for all of
their platforms.
It might be a good idea to document 'guideline' or lab tested
throughputs for various platforms.
It may not always be feasible - given the range, but it would help I
think.

Lets call it, 'An Engineers Guide to Cisco Performance Recommendations -
Based on Pre-configured Scenarios' :)

Stephen


-----Original Message-----
From: cisco-nsp-bounces at puck.nether.net
[mailto:cisco-nsp-bounces at puck.nether.net] On Behalf Of Peter Rathlev
Sent: 27 September 2010 17:41
To: Keegan Holley
Cc: Cisco NSPs
Subject: Re: [c-nsp] ISR G2 performance

On Mon, 2010-09-27 at 11:33 -0400, Keegan Holley wrote:
> I'm a little annoyed by their stance though.  I just want them to make
a
> recommendation that I can use instead of trying to fill my head with
> marketing nonsense.

I personally don't see "routerperformance.pdf" as marketing nonsense. It
gives you a basic figure to work with and makes it possible to compare
different platforms.

Of course a set of standard cases could be documented, e.g. "simple NAT,
one inside and one outside interface" or "simple LLQ with this specific
configuration". But one man's standard setup is an exotic setup for many
of his colleagues.

If Cisco were to announce "best case" forwarding figures, I would call
that marketing nonsense. :-)

-- 
Peter


_______________________________________________
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/



More information about the cisco-nsp mailing list