North American Network Operators Group Date Prev | Date Next | Date Index | Thread Index | Author Index | Historical RE: 12000 ACL issue
> -----Original Message----- > From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]]On Behalf Of > Rubens Kuhl Jr. > > Sup2(6500 or 7600) is not demand-based, there is no flow-based > forwarding on it; it can actually go that far, but you are right about > past (and most of current) Cisco claims. Please consult your favorite knowledgeable Cisco employee and try again. Understanding the 6500/7600 product matrix and its effects on forwarding tables is a pain - but required knowledge for successful implementation. There is a reason why CEF is configurable, and the DFC is an optional "card". > In order to have 30 Mpps inside 15Gbps traffic, packet size > on the line > would be 62.5 bytes and no silence between packets would be allowed. > When preambles and inter-frame-gaps are included, bottom line traffic > would be higher, and real packet size distribution would make > it usable > for up to lot more traffic. Actually 30 Mpps comes from how the 6500/7600's data bus works - 256 bits wide @ 62.5 Mhz = 16 Gbps (real numbers - Cisco states 32 Gb/s due to their creative accounting). 64 Byte frame takes 4 clock cycles (64ns) to get through the box (at minimum). With that you get 15 Mpps. That is base functionality - add x-bars, DFCs, x-bar enabled cards, etc, etc, and YMMV. But regardless.. the larger the frame the smaller the number of pps. > As this thread was started by ACL issues, are the 50/90/150 Mpps boxes > you mentioned capable of ACLs at these line rates ? > What other beasts besides IP II, Sup2, Eng 3 and Eng4/edge can handle > high-rate ACLs ? There are many vendors in the world that do line rate ACLs those speeds. I believe one vendor showed off 172mpps with ACLs at a tradeshow recently. Think it was about 50% of the cost of a 6500 also. But I could be wrong. .chance
|