[c-nsp] Opinions about the next 6500/7600

[Mack McBride]

The cost per gigabit is not at parity yet for low gigabit rates.
If you are maxing out a 7600 then a ASR 9K is definitely the next step.
The ASR 9K seems to be very mature for its age.

The requirement for full IPv4 tables is governed by multi-homed bgp customers connected at the aggregation layer.

As for the maturity level, we have a number of bug cases open on every platform we use.
We have customers that recently deployed N7K gear and were less than happy with the number of bugs encountered.
We would rather not expose our customers to the less mature (and it is less mature) code.

Curiously the ASR 1K which is a newer platform was very well conceived and has been relatively bug free.

Server refresh cycle is generally 18 months to 2 years while router refresh cycles are 5 to 10 years.
And yes we have acquisitions with 10 year old hardware.


Mack McBride
Network Architect

-----Original Message-----
From: cisco-nsp-bounces at puck.nether.net [mailto:cisco-nsp-bounces at puck.nether.net] On Behalf Of Chris Evans
Sent: Friday, February 04, 2011 11:47 AM
To: tvarriale at comcast.net
Cc: cisco-nsp
Subject: Re: [c-nsp] Opinions about the next 6500/7600

I concurr... already we have seen less issues with our 7ks than we have with
our 6500s both software and hardware wise.   Nx-os isn't bloated with
crap.....yet
On Feb 4, 2011 1:41 PM, "Tony Varriale" <tvarriale at comcast.net> wrote:
> On 2/4/2011 10:22 AM, Mack McBride wrote:
>> The most comparable for the 7600 is the ASR 9K but the cost differential
is significant.
>>
>> The Nexus 7000 is supposed to replace the 6500 for an aggregation switch
but the cost
>
> On a gigabit basis, the N7K is cheaper and has many more working
> enterprise features (ISSU, troubleshooting tools, netflow, etc) that
> most shops would appreciate over the 6500.
>
>> and other issues (bugs and lack of XL card) has slowed adoption.
>
> As for bugs, it's like any Cisco product/software these days. Just plan
> to reduce risk as much as possible. I think we've all seen some
> surprisingly horrible bugs on the "mature" 6500 platform. How's modular
> and real ISSU working out there?
>
> XL cards are now standard/priced the same as the non-XL. Done. But,
> what is your requirement for such large tables?
>> The other issues are getting sorted out which should help the 7K.
> Such as?
>> Cisco seems committed to the 6500 as a services platform.
> Yes, it appears they have extended the platform. Sort of like the SUP2T
> release (for 3-4 years). From my field chats, most concerns have been
> centered around PoE (and lack thereof on Nexus).
>> So it is likely to be around for a long time.
> Yeah it will be a good legacy platform moving forward and has it's place.
>> Our company tends to stay away from the bleeding edge so we are still
using the 6500/7600.
> The N7K is 3 years old this year. Hardly what I'd call bleeding edge in
> technology. In 3 years your servers went through 2 CPU updates.
>
> tv
> _______________________________________________
> 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/
_______________________________________________
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/