[c-nsp] Cisco 4000 series (4461) as a BGP router?

[Mark Tinka]

On 28/Oct/19 16:54, Gert Doering wrote:

>  
> But this should not be an excuse for a vendor not publishing basic
> things like "the forwarding hardware on <this generation foo> can 
> handle 4.13 trillion IPv4 entries, unless you use IPv6, in which case
> it goes down to only 22.000".

I don't disagree, but while Patrick will find RIB/FIB performance
numbers fairly basic and expected, so will someone else about pps, as
will someone else about fan speed, as will another about rack depth, and
someone else about NEBS, and another about port density, and another
about licenses, and another about power, and another about block
diagrams, and and and...

You see where I am going with this.

I always take web site information as an overview. If my interest is
piqued and there isn't enough data online for me to reach a conclusion,
I reach out to the vendor.

Recently, I spent about 5 e-mails getting Cisco to confirm to me that
their new 9300 Catalyst Ethernet switches actually do support
egress/ingress policing. Even if their web site did (ambiguously) state
this, historically, Ethernet switches have usually only done ingress
policing and egress shaping, hence my ardent concern.

If we are trying to avoid speaking to the vendors (something I would
like to do, don't get me wrong), that's unlikely to happen.

Mark.

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 801 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: <https://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-nsp/attachments/20191028/aed1b026/attachment.sig>