RE: 12000 ACL issue

["Chance Whaley" <chance () dreamscope com>]

> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-nanog () merit edu [mailto:owner-nanog () merit edu]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