[c-nsp] ISR 4451-X route table size

[Antoine Monnier]

I would have classified the ISR 445x-X range of routers as hardware-based
routers, based on the different hardwares (both memory and
"CPU"/forwarding-engine)  for control plane and data-plane.
On the other hand, I understood that the ISR 443x range are software-based
routers (same CPU/memory for control and data plane).





On Thu, Jan 15, 2015 at 2:20 PM, Phil Mayers <p.mayers at imperial.ac.uk>
wrote:

> On 15/01/15 12:26, sthaug at nethelp.no wrote:
>
>>  Interesting your distinction because Cisco says that the 4451:
>>>> "The product???s innovative hardware design splits the control and data
>>>> planes between two multi-core CPUs???
>>>>
>>>
>>> Indeed, that's where my definition would not trivially apply either way
>>> :-)
>>>
>>> (And given how fast multipurpose CPUs have become, we see this in other
>>> areas as well - like "SSL offloading PCI boards" that you could add to
>>> a web server for decent HTTPS performance... most of that has just plain
>>> disappeared with modern CPUs...)
>>>
>>
>> For me the relevant question is often: Can the box handle line rate,
>> or close to it, with minimum sized packets (and any access lists,
>> services, QoS etc that you need)? If it can, great - otherwise you're
>> opening yourself to a DoS attack at some point.
>>
>
> I tend to agree. I like predictable performance that degrades sensibly,
> not suddenly crossing a threshold and failing to work at all. Whether it's
> FPGA, TCAM or CPU and fast RAM is in theory irrelevant.
>
> In practice, vendors tend to be rosy about their performance, and the
> underlying architecture can indicate the likely performance window ;o)
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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/
>