[c-nsp] cat6500/fwsm performance

[Tony Varriale]

On 6/3/2011 3:30 PM, Jeff Bacon wrote:
> I am, however, left with one mystery.
>
>
> How can the Cisco docs on a FWSM claim a 30-usec latency when clearly it
> isn't capable of that, at least not in any configuration that I'm aware
> of? Granted that it's all lies, damn lies, and marketing material, but
> putting that number in the main data sheet on the main product page for
> the card is a pretty ballsy lie even for Cisco.
>
>
>
> From: David White, Jr. (dwhitejr) [mailto:dwhitejr at cisco.com]
> Sent: Friday, June 03, 2011 12:04 AM
> To: Jeff Bacon
> Cc: Pete Templin; Peter Rathlev; cisco-nsp at puck.nether.net
> Subject: Re: [c-nsp] cat6500/fwsm performance
>
>
>
> And here is a great doc TAC wrote up on single flow TCP performance
> which should answer all your questions:
>
> https://supportforums.cisco.com/docs/DOC-12668
>
> Sincerely,
>
> David.
>
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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/
>
How are you calculating that number?  Right before it, it says 30ms.  
What about that?  Ever think it may be a typo?  The way that stated that 
sentence looks very ambiguous.

Typically Cisco is correct on the numbers, but how they calculate that 
number isn't always obvious.

How do you calculate the Sup720 throughput?

tv