[c-nsp] Most cost effective 100G router?

James Bensley jwbensley at gmail.com
Thu Jan 21 04:17:42 EST 2016

On 21 January 2016 at 09:13, Adam Vitkovsky <Adam.Vitkovsky at gamma.co.uk> wrote:
>> Peter Kranz
>> Sent: Wednesday, January 20, 2016 11:18 PM
>> Happy to clarify James, to expand:
>> " Anyone have any thoughts the most cost effective chassis available
>> currently that supports 100G ports? Need to route upwards of 200 Gbps and
>> handle full tables, but cost is definitely a factor."
>> I would be using 2x100G ports to upstream providers pulling full tables..
>> and probably 10G LAG groups or 40G ports to feed the downstream user
>> who does not have 100G port capabilities.
>> If I spread across two chassis for redundancy and failover.. then each chassis
>> would have:
>> 1 100G port facing an upstream
>> 1 100G port facing the other chassis
>> 10 10G or 4 40G ports facing the downstream customer Full routes
>> The application doesn't really support spending $200k on the solution, so I'm
>> looking around for something game changing. I think 100G might be too
>> young at this point to find it honestly.
> Maybe the cheapest would be good old ASR9K6, -now with the advent of new chassis these should be pretty cheap
> where each would have just a single A9K-RSP440-LT -that's 180G/slot upgradeable to 440G/slot (I'm pretty sure customer won't be pulling 200G)
> and one 2x100GE and one 24x10GE card
> and one power supply (though I'd double check if one is enough)
> -you don't need any redundancy in a single box as there are going to be two boxes.

Thats what I was just thining except in an ASR 9904.


More information about the cisco-nsp mailing list