[c-nsp] Understanding ASR1k / ESP40 capacity

[Ruslan Pustovoytov]

Think not only throughput but about pps also.
According to cisco doc ESP40 has ~24Mpps capacity, ESP20 has the same 
limitation.
So, you pick out all resources from QFP.
RA write the report where you can see this limitation - 
http://www.slideshare.net/RouterAnalysis/cisco-asr-1000-series-testing-results-and-analysis 



06.10.2014 18:24, Simon Lockhart пишет:
> Pete,
>
> Thanks for this - I'll watch that preso and see if it adds anything useful.
>
> You seem to be supporting my viewpoint, and I've also had an off-list reply
> supporting TAC's viewpoint - so I'm not sure I'm any further forwards.
>
> I'm currently working on a plan to replace the ESP40 with an ESP100 - but as
> the ESP100 isn't supported in the ASR1004, I'll also have to do a chassis swap
> to an ASR1006. My only remaining concern with this plan is whether the SIP40
> can really do 40Gbps. If I stick 4 * 10G SPA's into a SIP40, can I run those
> 10G ports at line-rate (assuming sufficient ESP capacity)?
>
> Many thanks,
>
> Simon
>
>
>
> On Sat Oct 04, 2014 at 11:56:45AM -0400, Pete Lumbis wrote:
>> It would be a single pass through the QFP. The SIP could also be a limiting
>> factor, but since you are split between SIPs that shouldn't be an issue.
>> The SIP 40 has 2x 40Gig lanes on the backplane. Are you doing crypto or
>> anything like that which would impact performance?
>>
>> There is a great Cisco Live preso on the ASR1k architecture that might help
>> you get some ammo to go back to TAC with.
>> http://d2zmdbbm9feqrf.cloudfront.net/2014/usa/pdf/BRKARC-2001.pdf
>>
>> -Pete
>>
>> On Sat, Oct 4, 2014 at 4:56 AM, Simon Lockhart <simon at slimey.org> wrote:
>>
>>> All,
>>>
>>> I'm banging my head against a brick wall trying to get sensible answers
>>> from
>>> Cisco TAC, so thought I'd ask the educated masses who may have come across
>>> this before...
>>>
>>> I've got a Cisco ASR1004 with RP2, ESP40, 2 * SIP40's, and 8 * 10GE ports.
>>>
>>> A snapshot of usage on these ports at peak is:
>>>
>>> Interface         RxBps     RxPps          TxBps     TxPps
>>> Te0/0/0   4,385,563,000   515,508    906,118,000   339,997
>>> Te0/1/0   3,942,338,000   419,696    984,150,000   358,436
>>> Te0/2/0   3,949,993,000   425,192    933,257,000   349,145
>>> Te0/3/0   4,375,526,000   512,858    873,284,000   334,751
>>> Te1/0/0   1,186,440,000   454,714  5,474,029,000   630,916
>>> Te1/1/0     622,154,000   244,056  3,181,689,000   338,190
>>> Te1/2/0     711,493,000   253,275  3,211,560,000   340,950
>>> Te1/3/0   1,218,873,000   437,195  4,831,708,000   568,488
>>>
>>> TOTAL    20,392,380,000 3,262,494 20,395,795,000 3,260,873
>>>
>>> I'm seeing throughput issues on a portchannel consisting of Te0/0/0 and
>>> Te0/3/0
>>> (it won't go over 10Gbps aggregate)
>>>
>>> Cisco TAC are telling me if I add TxBps and RxBps totals together, I get
>>> 40Gbps,
>>> so I've reached capacity of the QFP (i.e. ESP40).
>>>
>>> My arguement against this is that a packet which enters the router on
>>> Te0/0/0,
>>> goes through the SIP40 in slot 0, through the ESP40, through the SIP40 in
>>> slot
>>> 1, and out through Te1/0/0 is still just one packet, so should only need
>>> to be
>>> counted once through the ESP, and once for each SIP. Hence, the throughput
>>> on
>>> the ESP is only 20.3Gbps on those numbers above.
>>>
>>> If I poll ceqfpUtilProcessingLoad by SNMP, I see peaks of around 65%, which
>>> would correlate with this level of throughput.
>>>
>>> I'm assuming there are others of you using this platform. What sort of
>>> throughput are you seeing? Am I right, or is the Cisco TAC engineer?
>>>
>>> TIA,
>>>
>>> Simon
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> 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/
>>>
> _______________________________________________
> 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/
>