*********************** Your mail has been scanned by InterScan VirusWall. ***********-*********** Hi, Apologies if this is not deemed operational enough. Further to the debate about prefixes / v6 / multihomeing etc etc. The growing size of the route table, de-aged networks and increasing corporate mutlihomeing all drive up the size of the route table and brings pressure to bear on the memory requirements of our routers. Now while I want to steer well clear of the my box is better than your box discussion - I was wondering if anyone had a view on what would happen if I managed to source an SDRAM of 512MB / 1GB of the same specification as the 256MB Cisco compatible memory that you use in an 7200 NPE225. Cisco say the maximum ram for that NPE is a pitiful 256MB, I am sure the memory manufacturers will have made larger SDRAMs, while recognising it would be fully unsupported what would happen if we tried to stick in a larger memory module in the NPE.... I can always go out and spend 5K per box on NPE G1 cards for each router, but operationally I don't need faster processors but I do need more RAM and I don't really see why I should be forced by Cisco to purchase an expensive upgrade just because they say 256MB is the maximum when I suspect we would be able to get away with sticking in a large SDRAM. Anyone got any thoughts on whether this would work or not? It must be costing us all a small operational fortune in router upgrades brought about by the growing BGP table size. And yes I do know that if I was running Quagga on a PC I could have 4GB of inexpensive RAM very easily, but I want to avoid the x is better than y discussion. Kind Regards Ben Butler ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ C2 Internet Ltd Globe House The Gullet Nantwich Cheshire CW5 5RL W http://www.c2internet.net/ T +44-(0)845-658-0020 F +44-(0)845-658-0070 All quotes & services from C2 are bound by our standard terms and conditions which are available on our website at: http://www.c2internet.net/legal/main.htm#tandc
Ben Butler wrote:
if anyone had a view on what would happen if I managed to source an SDRAM of 512MB / 1GB of the same specification as the 256MB Cisco compatible memory that you use in an 7200 NPE225. Cisco say the maximum ram for that NPE is a pitiful 256MB, I am sure the memory manufacturers will have made larger SDRAMs, while recognising it would be fully unsupported what would happen if we tried to stick in a larger memory module in the NPE....
I am just guessing here, but if the manufacturer says 256MB is the maximum, I would expect that the unit is not able to address more than 256MB memory, regardless of the amount you plug in to it.
It must be costing us all a small operational fortune in router upgrades brought about by the growing BGP table size. And yes I do know that if I was running Quagga on a PC I could have 4GB of inexpensive RAM very easily, but I want to avoid the x is better than y discussion.
Apart from the fact what is better than something else: I think it is very brave to use unsupported hardware to operate a network. If something fails, you are on your own then. No support from the vendor. One of the things where being brave and being insane are only seperated by a very thin line ;-) Nils
On Fri, 21 Oct 2005, Nils Ketelsen wrote:
I am just guessing here, but if the manufacturer says 256MB is the maximum, I would expect that the unit is not able to address more than 256MB memory, regardless of the amount you plug in to it.
Occasionally, that's not the case. i.e. the NPE225 was originally spec'd as having a max RAM capacity of 128mb. I've got an old Sony notebook that Sony says is upgradable to 256mb...but several manufacturers make a more densely populated dimm for it that allowed me to upgrade it to 384mb. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Jon Lewis | I route Senior Network Engineer | therefore you are Atlantic Net | _________ http://www.lewis.org/~jlewis/pgp for PGP public key_________
Nils Ketelsen <nils.ketelsen@kuehne-nagel.com> writes:
Ben Butler wrote:
if anyone had a view on what would happen if I managed to source an SDRAM of 512MB / 1GB of the same specification as the 256MB Cisco compatible memory that you use in an 7200 NPE225. Cisco say the maximum ram for that NPE is a pitiful 256MB, I am sure the memory manufacturers will have made larger SDRAMs, while recognising it would be fully unsupported what would happen if we tried to stick in a larger memory module in the NPE....
I am just guessing here, but if the manufacturer says 256MB is the maximum, I would expect that the unit is not able to address more than 256MB memory, regardless of the amount you plug in to it.
That's not entirely a reasonable conclusion - the npe225 only "supported" 128m and a lot of us were running them with 256m.
Apart from the fact what is better than something else: I think it is very brave to use unsupported hardware to operate a network. If something fails, you are on your own then. No support from the vendor.
Of course, if you don't have the hardware under support contract in the first place...
One of the things where being brave and being insane are only seperated by a very thin line ;-)
Indeed. ---Rob
participants (4)
-
Ben Butler -
Jon Lewis -
Nils Ketelsen -
Robert E.Seastrom