[c-nsp] Huawei NE40E-X3 vs Cisco AS9K

[Tassos Chatzithomaoglou]

Latest hw version (V600R300) of NE40 should support 200G per slot (400G ready) and 16x10G 
LCs (only on X8, X16).
I don't know the exact over-subscription factor (16x10G LCs probably have 100G fabric), so 
i'm a little bit sceptical about all these numbers.
What worries me most is the low memory options (2G and 4G).

ASR9k is currently at 160G (or 184G?) per slot (with dual RSPs) and 16x10G LCs (~120G 
fabric), but is 360G ready (new RSP/LCs are coming)

We are also evaluating both platforms (ASR9k is already in our production network).
Besides some issues related to IOS-XR, other issues include limited functionality under 
BVIs and limit of 1,5G traffic mirroring on 10G ports.
Keep in mind that ASR1k might be a better choice if you are looking for fewer 10G ports 
and more memory.

--
Tassos


Waseem wrote on 28/9/2011 22:35:
>
> I was checking the NE40 document, quote "The NE40E-X3 has three LPU slots. Each slot supports 40-Gbit/s upstream
> traffic and 40-Gbit/s downstream traffic. The switching capacity is
> 1.08Tbit/s", you can ask the marketing team to give you the product documentation, and regarding the 8x10G LPU as the document says the router doesn't support, the maximum is 4x10G XFP.
>
>
> regards.
>
> ________________________________
> From: Manuel Marín<mmg at transtelco.net>
> To: Waseem<waseem_aliraqi at yahoo.com>
> Cc: NSP<cisco-nsp at puck.nether.net>
> Sent: Wednesday, September 28, 2011 10:22 PM
> Subject: Re: [c-nsp] Huawei NE40E-X3 vs Cisco AS9K
>
>
> We are using the RSP720 and 3CXLs. Both have performance issues when dealing with multiple BGP sessions, When one of the full bgp peer flaps or when there is a link flap the other routing protocols start to flap as well. I'll try to tweak the timers in the mean time. Usually the CPU usage is around 70%.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> On Wed, Sep 28, 2011 at 1:16 PM, Waseem<waseem_aliraqi at yahoo.com>  wrote:
>
> Hi Manuel,
>>
>> What are the supervisor engines that you are using on the 7600 routers.
>>
>>
>> Regards,
>> Waseem
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> On Wed, Sep 28, 2011 at 6:47 AM, Waseem<waseem_aliraqi at yahoo.com>  wrote:
>>
>> Hi,
>>>   
>>> We've been in the same situation, a small note: per slot
> capacity of the ASR9K is 320G it takes 40G and 100G SPAs while for NE40E-X3 is
> 40G, almost the same as Cisco's 7600.
>>>
>>> Regards,
>>> Waseem 
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> ________________________________
>>> From: Manuel Marín<mmg at transtelco.net>
>>> To: cisco-nsp at puck.nether.net
>>> Sent: Wednesday, September 28, 2011 9:56 AM
>>> Subject: [c-nsp] Huawei NE40E-X3 vs Cisco AS9K
>>>
>>>
>>> Hi
>>>
>>> We are currently looking for alternatives to upgrade cisco 76XX  routers and
>>> we are comparing Huawei NE40E-X3 vs Cisco ASR9K. I was wondering if someone
>>> can share their experience with Huawey routers as Core MPLS routers.
>>>
>>> Any advice would be greatly
> appreciated
>>> Thanks
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> 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/
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>> -- 
>> Manuel Marín
>> Transtelco Inc.
>> 1.9152172232
>>
>>
>>
>>
>