[c-nsp] Small DC switch design

[Dan Letkeman]

This switch will never need to hold a bgp table.  I do how ever want
to do PBR, and I am finding mixed messages on if it works or not.  And
if it does work will it work in my situation or will it switch in
software and have poor performance?   The idea of using it as an
aggregation switch would mean that it would have to do PBR at line
speed which it probably won't do.  I don't know if there is a better
way to do what I am trying to accomplish but my scenario is like this:

traffic -->---me3600x-----router a------firewall
                             |
                             -----router b-----firewall

All I want to do is PBR some traffic to router b.   The link speed
will be either 1gbps fiber or 2gbps etherchannel, and if I apply a
route-map on an interface at that speed will it choke?  If so what
other option do I have?

Thanks,
Dan.


On Wed, May 16, 2012 at 2:31 AM, Mark Tinka <mark.tinka at seacom.mu> wrote:
> On Wednesday, May 16, 2012 05:14:54 AM Dan Letkeman wrote:
>
>> Most high bandwidth traffic is to and from the servers
>> and sans, and would stay within the 4500-E, second to
>> that would be the traffic from all of the users from all
>> the buildings to and from the servers, and then all of
>> the internet traffic.  Some of the things I would like
>> to do with the me3600x is PBR, possibly some shaping or
>> policing, eigrp routing, and some access lists.  Netflow
>> would be nice, but it doesn't seem like it supports it.
>
> Be mindful that while the ME3600X is, for all intents and
> purposes, a switch which is also a decent router, much of
> that functionality is not yet available in the software,
> even though the hardware supports it.
>
> And when the features do come, it's uncertain how they'll
> perform in the wild, given the box is still relatively new.
>
> Also remember that if you ever want to hold a full BGP IPv4
> table, the ME3600X/3800X can't do it.
>
> Mark.