nanog mailing list archives
Re: switch 10G standalone TOR, core to DC
From: Nick Hilliard <nick () foobar org>
Date: Tue, 12 Feb 2013 15:45:25 +0000
On 12/02/2013 14:23, Piotr wrote:
shared 9 MB packet buffer pool that is allocated dynamically to ports that are congested 9MB is a standard size of port buffers..
That's pretty standard for a cut-thru ToR switch of this style. Cut-thru switches generally need a lot less packet buffer space than store-n-forward switches. Also, ToR boxes tend not to have complex qos requirements. Having said that, you need to be careful deploying small-buffer boxes. If you're not careful, you will end up with bad packet loss. Nick
Current thread:
- Re: switch 10G standalone TOR, core to DC excelsio (Feb 07)
- RE: switch 10G standalone TOR, core to DC Sergey Marunich (Feb 07)
- Re: switch 10G standalone TOR, core to DC Piotr (Feb 12)
- Re: switch 10G standalone TOR, core to DC Nick Hilliard (Feb 12)
- Re: switch 10G standalone TOR, core to DC Bao Nguyen (Feb 19)
- Re: switch 10G standalone TOR, core to DC Peter Phaal (Feb 19)
- Re: switch 10G standalone TOR, core to DC Dan Sneddon (Feb 19)
- Re: switch 10G standalone TOR, core to DC Piotr (Feb 12)
- RE: switch 10G standalone TOR, core to DC Sergey Marunich (Feb 07)