nanog mailing list archives
Re: Force10 Gear - Opinions
From: Jo Rhett <jrhett () netconsonance com>
Date: Wed, 3 Sep 2008 17:22:55 -0700
On Aug 25, 2008, at 8:29 PM, James Jun wrote:
As a box designed with the enterprise datacenter in mind, the E-serieslooks to be missing several key service provider features, including MPLS and advanced control plane filtering/policing.Ah, because Cisco does either of these in hardware?Yes. PFC3 inside Supervisor 32, 720 and RSP 720 for Catalyst 6500/ Router7600 series perform both of these features in hardware. The article mentioned in this thread compares Force10 E against the 6500 series.
Sorry, I was on an installation with 6500s and 720s trying to do uRPF and it kept falling back to software and killing the units. What your reading has no reality in my experience.
I've been told exactly the same about MPLS by someone I trust (and who would only speak based on real experience, not reading online articles)
"It works kindof, but when it fails you lose the entire network". -- Jo RhettNet Consonance : consonant endings by net philanthropy, open source and other randomness
Current thread:
- Re: Force10 Gear - Opinions jim deleskie (Sep 01)
- Re: Force10 Gear - Opinions Owen DeLong (Sep 01)
- <Possible follow-ups>
- Re: Force10 Gear - Opinions Jo Rhett (Sep 03)
- RE: Force10 Gear - Opinions James Jun (Sep 03)
- Re: Force10 Gear - Opinions Jo Rhett (Sep 03)
- Re: Force10 Gear - Opinions Rubens Kuhl Jr. (Sep 03)
- Cisco uRPF failures Jo Rhett (Sep 04)
- Re: Cisco uRPF failures Anton Kapela (Sep 06)
- Re: Cisco uRPF failures Christopher Morrow (Sep 06)
- Re: Cisco uRPF failures Jo Rhett (Sep 11)
- Re: Cisco uRPF failures Sam Stickland (Sep 07)
- Re: Cisco uRPF failures Saku Ytti (Sep 08)
- Re: Cisco uRPF failures Jo Rhett (Sep 11)
- RE: Force10 Gear - Opinions James Jun (Sep 03)