North American Network Operators Group

Date Prev | Date Next | Date Index | Thread Index | Author Index | Historical

Re: Anyone Deployed Ascend's GRF IP Switch?

  • From: Joe Shaw
  • Date: Tue Aug 26 03:27:48 1997

On Mon, 25 Aug 1997, joseph j. kim wrote:

> i don't understand all of the mail comparing the two, there is really no
> comparison. the GSR blows the GRF away. 

I wasn't comparing the GSR and the GRF.  I was comparing the Cisco 7508
that I used to have at a previous job to the GRF 400 I just got.  As far
as the GSR goes, I haven't seen one in real life.  It sounds cool, but I
want to see one for myself before I say the thing walks on water.  My GRF
works great now, and I'm satisfied with it's performance so far, though
right now it's still not doing much.

> there is an order of magnitude
> difference in the aggregate b/w supported between the two correct? 4Mb/s
> vs 40Mb/s. 

>From the Ascend Web Page: 

           Available in two sizes, the GRF 400 holds up to 4 media
           cards for up to 4 Gb/s bandwidth, while the GRF 1600
           supports up to 16 media cards for up to 16 Gb/s of
           bandwidth. The unique GRF switching architecture is
           specially designed to handle network growth while
           providing consistent, high performance, regardless of the
           dynamics of the network. 

It has the following cards: 
	Ascend ATM OC-3c IP Forwarding Media Card
	Ascend FDDI IP Forwarding Media Card
	Ascend HSSI IP Forwarding Media Card
	Ascend IP/SONET OC-3c IP Forwarding Media Card
	Ascend 10/100Base-T IP Forwarding Media Card

For more details, check http://www.ascend.com/300.html.

>From Cisco's:

 technology preview of Cisco's new family of gigabit switch routers (GSRs)
 providing high performance solutions ranging from 5 to 60 Gb/s for
 Internet and large-scale WAN Intranet backbone applications.

Now, I've got a GRF 400 with the ATM OC-3c card, the FDDI card, and the
10/100Base-T card.  It works flawlessly.  And I can't honestly see how the 

> Also, not that I know anything about the GRF but I think Cisco
> claims that 7500 real-world performance is much better than the GRF400.

I've had cisco sales reps claim even more ludicrous things while the
support engineer started turning red, so who knows...

Comparing GateD to IOS becomes more of a religious preference than
anything else.  I'm content knowing both, truth be told.

> maybe someone can post some performance numbers.
> -jjk
> 

Joe Shaw - [email protected]
NetAdmin - Insync Internet Services