[c-nsp] 6500, 7600 or ASR

[chip]

Let's all also remember the TCAM limitations on the 7600/Sup2T platform.
 With the BGP table growing like it is, you'll need to carve up IPv4/IPv6
TCAM allocation and could likely run out in the not-so-distant future.
 IMHO, unless something amazing happens for the 7600/Supervisor platform,
this thing is dead as a DFZ BGP router and people should be looking
elsewhere moving forward.  Both ASR lines (1k/9k) offer much better
"router" capabilities and growth paths.  The 6500/7600 platform has had a
helluva run, but I believe its time has passed.

*Note* These are my opinions only, I have no crystal ball, as with all
things there are exceptions

--chip


On Thu, Aug 29, 2013 at 11:38 AM, Tony Varriale <tvarriale at comcast.net>wrote:

> On 8/29/2013 9:12 AM, Mark Tinka wrote:
>
>> Same here - the RP2 in the ASR1001 will scale well when you
>> run as many full feeds as you want.
>>
> It's not an RP2...more of a RP2 lite :)  Also note the memory restriction
> on the 1001 compared to a RP2 system.
>
> As a general thought, stay away from RP1 systems (such as a 1002).
>
>
>> I'd go with 2x units if all you need is a handful of Gig-E
>> ports and no SONET/SDH or other non-Ethernet requirements.
>>
> This +1.
>
> tv
>
>
> ______________________________**_________________
> cisco-nsp mailing list  cisco-nsp at puck.nether.net
> https://puck.nether.net/**mailman/listinfo/cisco-nsp<https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nsp>
> archive at http://puck.nether.net/**pipermail/cisco-nsp/<http://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-nsp/>
>



-- 
Just my $.02, your mileage may vary,  batteries not included, etc....