[c-nsp] ME3800X/ME3600X/ME3600X-24CX/ASR903/ASR901 Deployment Simplification Feedback

Stephen Fulton sf at lists.esoteric.ca
Sun Jul 21 22:23:31 EDT 2013

I'll add my +1 to Mark's suggestions, and request more 10GE ports. 
We're receiving more requests for 10GE (mostly sub-rate, some line-rate) 
from our customers and offers from our carrier suppliers for the same. 
The 3600X-24CX fits part of that bill, but I'd really prefer something 
with more than 8GE ports when the four 10GE ports are activated.

-- Stephen

On 21/07/2013 5:29 PM, Waris Sagheer (waris) wrote:
> Hi Mark,
> Thanks for all the feedback.
> Couple of questions and clarification,
> - 48 gig port switch requirement, I suppose you also need 4x10Gig uplink along with 48 Gig port, correct?
> - Per pop growth, I'll get get back to you with a solution to seek your feedback
> - Can you give me an idea in terms of number of FIB entries requirement?
> - Can you elaborate your comment "(particularly coming as close to the flexibility of what software routers like the 7200 can do)"? Any 7200 example functionality.
> Best Regards,
> [http://www.cisco.com/web/europe/images/email/signature/horizontal06.jpg]
> Waris Sagheer
> Technical Marketing Manager
> Service Provider Access Group
> waris at cisco.com<mailto:waris at cisco.com>
> Phone: +1 408 853 6682
> Mobile: +1 408 835 1389
> CCIE - 19901
> <http://www.cisco.com/>
> [Think before you print.] Think before you print.
> This email may contain confidential and privileged material for the sole use of the intended recipient. Any review, use, distribution or disclosure by others is strictly prohibited. If you are not the intended recipient (or authorized to receive for the recipient), please contact the sender by reply email and delete all copies of this message.
> For corporate legal information go to:
> http://www.cisco.com/web/about/doing_business/legal/cri/index.html
> From: "mark.tinka at seacom.mu<mailto:mark.tinka at seacom.mu>" <mark.tinka at seacom.mu<mailto:mark.tinka at seacom.mu>>
> Organization: SEACOM
> Reply-To: "mark.tinka at seacom.mu<mailto:mark.tinka at seacom.mu>" <mark.tinka at seacom.mu<mailto:mark.tinka at seacom.mu>>
> Date: Saturday, July 20, 2013 10:34 PM
> To: "cisco-nsp at puck.nether.net<mailto:cisco-nsp at puck.nether.net>" <cisco-nsp at puck.nether.net<mailto:cisco-nsp at puck.nether.net>>
> Cc: Waris Sagheer <waris at cisco.com<mailto:waris at cisco.com>>
> Subject: Re: [c-nsp] ME3800X/ME3600X/ME3600X-24CX/ASR903/ASR901 Deployment Simplification Feedback
> On Tuesday, March 19, 2013 09:27:45 AM Waris Sagheer (waris)
> wrote:
> Hi Everyone,
> I have seen lot of good inputs on this mailer. I am
> collecting feedback for the existing deployment
> challenges on the following platforms so that we can
> address them.
> -ME3800X
> -ME3600X
> -ME3600X-24CX
> -ASR903
> -ASR901
> -ME3400E
> - I would like to see a variant of the ME3600X/3800X
>    that provides for at least 4x 10Gbps SFP+ uplink
>    ports.
> - I would like to see a variant of the ME3600X/3800X
>    that provided for 48x Gig-E copper or fibre ports
>    in a 1U chassis (I'll also take a 1.5U chassis if
>    times are really hard). Yes, all at line rate :-).
> - I would like to see a solution that allows for PoP
>    growth. We've had scenarios where the number of
>    ME3600X/3800X chassis has grown to a level to
>    justify looking at a chassis (ASR9000 or
>    MX480/960), but the line card costs alone still
>    make stacking yet another ME3600X/3800X a
>    commercially better idea, but lousy for
>    operations. What can the team do to allow
>    operators to grow ports and scale on a per-PoP
>    basis while simplifying operations and keeping
>    port costs down? I've never been drawn to
>    virtual/multi-chassis systems, but... :-).
> - I'm not very heavy on growing the FIB on the
>    ME3600X/3800X systems, but any thought Cisco can
>    put into this that doesn't make the cost of
>    building the units outrageous would be much
>    appreciated. This isn't critical for me; just a
>    very nice-to-have.
> In addition to what Nick and the others have already
> mentioned, those are the things I'd like to see addressed,
> Waris.
> For me, one of the things that pleases me most about the
> ME3600X/3800X (apart from the fact that we can drop STP and
> extend IP/MPLS into the Access) is that QoS is normal,
> simple and behaves like a regular Cisco router. Additional
> work and simplification in this area (particularly coming as
> close to the flexibility of what software routers like the
> 7200 can do) would be much appreciated. You have no idea how
> much it sucked running the 3750ME as a Metro-E IP/MPLS
> Access platform and trying to do simple or complex QoS
> strategies for customers and the core :-).
> Many thanks for reaching out to the community about this,
> Waris. It makes all the difference for us operators, and is
> more of what we would like to see from our preferred
> vendors.
> Cheers,
> Mark.
> _______________________________________________
> 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/

More information about the cisco-nsp mailing list