Same here using MX routers and Brocade +1 for MX due to the "unix" shell =) Med vänlig hälsning Andreas Larsen IP-Only Telecommunication AB| Postadress: 753 81 UPPSALA | Besöksadress: S:t Persgatan 6, Uppsala | Telefon: +46 (0)18 843 10 00 | Direkt: +46 (0)18 843 10 56 www.ip-only.se -----Ursprungligt meddelande----- Från: Jimmy Hess [mailto:mysidia@gmail.com] Skickat: den 10 december 2013 04:35 Till: Mikael Abrahamsson Kopia: NANOG list; Jawaid Desktop Ämne: Re: What routers do folks use these days? On Fri, Nov 29, 2013 at 12:02 AM, Mikael Abrahamsson <swmike@swm.pp.se>wrote:
[snip]
+1 for MX or ASR 9000.
Cisco ASR 9000, Juniper MX, Huawei NE40E, Alcatel-Lucent 7750, those kinds of routers are the ones I hear people using. Some go for the new Sup2T for the 6500, but I don't know how much more CPU it has compared to your SUP/RSP720, perhaps someone else knows?
Cat6500 Sup720 was a platform that used two separate processors; 1 Switch Processor CPU at 600mhz managing Layer 2 services, and 1 Route processor CPU at 600MHz on the MSFC to run the Layer 3 services. these were MIPS CPUs --- sr71000. Cat650 Sup2T is shown as a single Dual core, 1.5GHz per Core cpu. There is one processor stack on the 2T, instead of two separate CPUs; since route processor and switch processor are now combined into one shared processing unit under the new "merged" architecture that runs only one IOS image, that controls both RP and SP features ---- Layer 2, Layer 3, and management services do not run on separate processors, with their own separate hw anymore. So the CPU is beefier --- but it is also now shared by multiple functions that previously had separate, isolated processing from one another. I believe the Sup2T are using a E500 PowerPC chip. In any event, neither old nor new are based on x86 architecture --- keep in mind, that comparison of MHz or GHz CPU frequency rates is only meaningful within the same CPU architecture. There are not significant increases in FIB TCAM, or other important memory capacities from RSP720, that you would expect to need for scalability to larger tables. Even with 2T I would still describe the 65xx as largely a great switching platform, for 10/100/1000 aggregation -- due to limited chassis bandwidth: its days would seem to be numbered once desktops are sporting 10 gigabit links: definitely not (IMO) the best hardware router platform for carrying large routing tables at the ISP edge, anyways.
Mikael Abrahamsson email: swmike@swm.pp.se
-- -JH