Well this has been quite a stimulating discussion!
It appears the sweet spot would be as follows:
7507 Dual A/C Power.....~ 750
Dual RSP4 with 256 MEM .~900
VIP2-50 with 128 MB RAM.~400
Now this can all be obtained for about 2000.00 perhaps...
The problem is the Fast Ethernet Interfaces
CX-FEIP-2TX ( 400?)
PA-FE-TX (250)
The PA-2FE-TX is about 1600.00- better to get a second PA-FE-TX with
second VIP2-50
Now why is the CX-FEIP-2TX so much cheaper than the PA-2FE-TX ???
Alexander Hagen
Etheric Networks Incorporated, A California Corporation
527 Sixth Street No 371261
Montara CA 94037
Main Line: (650)-728-3375
Direct Line: (650) 728-3086
Cell: (650) 740-0650 (Does not work at our office in Montara)
Home: (Emgcy or weekends) 650-728-5820
fax: (650) 240-1750 http://www.etheric.net
I can't say why cisco charges so much for the PA-2FE, but the CX-FEIP-2TX
is cheap because it's ancient (EOL'd some time ago) and probably not
capable of running both ports at line-rate anyway. Don't buy them unless
you're hooking up very low traffic LANs. Your best bet is PA-FE's and
enough VIP2-50's for the number of PA-FE's you need.
Also, watch out for PA-2FEISL-TX's. They're also not capable of handling
both interfaces at line-rate. That's why they're available for just a few
hundred $.
I believe because the CX-FEIP-2TX is a full length card.
The PA-2FE-TX also isn't able to handle a full 100Mbps per port, so don't
be suprised if it doesn't work well
> The PA-2FE-TX is about 1600.00- better to get a second PA-FE-TX with
> second VIP2-50
>
> Now why is the CX-FEIP-2TX so much cheaper than the PA-2FE-TX ???
I believe because the CX-FEIP-2TX is a full length card.
The PA-2FE-TX also isn't able to handle a full 100Mbps per port, so don't
be suprised if it doesn't work well
VIP2/50 is a much better combo.
The reason that the CX-FEIP-2TX is so inexpensive is that it is
interesting mainly as a curiousity of transitional technology.
A CX-FEIP-2TX is VIP1, not a VIP2 (even a 2-15 or 2-20), and is
incapable of being upgraded to do distributed anything, (cef, flow,
whatever). It barely does full-duplex at line rate on one port, let
alone two.
Its sole use, if you happen to like to keep old hardware around, is
that it will work in a 7000/7010 with RP/[S]SP, (ie, not an RSP). You
can use them in a 7500 (or a 7000 with an RSP7k), but why would you
want to?
I bought a Riverstone Rs-3000 for BGP with a single upstream provider.
Great Deal.
Yeah, it might be a Great Deal (tm), but you're in for some surprises. I've seen an RS-8600 (with CM3 and 512MB on board) nearly melt under 13Mbps of Nachi, to the point that I had to set the CM failover keepalive timer to >30 seconds. We had a failover one night due to CPU exhaustion - I think the route reconvergence was actually worse than the performance of the box prior to the failover, but that's just my opinion. I've also seen the same unit nearly melt under 9Mbps of SQL Slammer - the CPU was so busy setting up flows that it was unable to rate limit this customer to 1Mbps or anywhere close. On a box with a 64Gbps backplane, I'm certainly not impressed, though I guess if I just used it as a switch it'd be happy.
Plus, you'll have a whole new learning curve for BGP. Wanna use a route map outbound? Expect it to reference the whole RIB, not just the BGP routes you've learned, redistributed, or flagged locally for announcement. Wanna edit a route map? sh run groups similar commands together, but sorts them in the order they were input, regardless of route map name and/or sequence number. The only strong point that jumps out is the ability to comment - I just wrote "ALL" of the route maps I thought I'd need and commented the maintenance and emergency segments before deploying it. And I guess cascading route maps on BGP sessions is a benefit, at least to overcome the CLI sorting.
> I bought a Riverstone Rs-3000 for BGP with a single upstream provider.
> Great Deal.
Yeah, it might be a Great Deal (tm), but you're in for some surprises.
I've seen an RS-8600 (with CM3 and 512MB on board) nearly melt under
13Mbps of Nachi, to the point that I had to set the CM failover
keepalive timer to >30 seconds.
This should come as no surprise - the Riverstone boxes are flow-based.
Yes. I've been looking at it and a 7505 with a 3550 behind it seems the
way to go for our type of operation.
As a cost cutting alternative - has anyone played with the 2900 XL
series using sub interfaces to turn them into virtual router ports ? or
vlan groups ?
Is it better to just buy a 3550 ?
Alexander Hagen
Etheric Networks Incorporated, A California Corporation
527 Sixth Street No 371261
Montara CA 94037
Main Line: (650)-728-3375
Direct Line: (650) 728-3086
Cell: (650) 740-0650 (Does not work at our office in Montara)
Home: (Emgcy or weekends) 650-728-5820
fax: (650) 240-1750 http://www.etheric.net
Yes. I've been looking at it and a 7505 with a 3550 behind it seems the
way to go for our type of operation.
As a cost cutting alternative - has anyone played with the 2900 XL
series using sub interfaces to turn them into virtual router ports ? or
vlan groups ?
Is it better to just buy a 3550 ?
If you're only doing basic Ethernet-Ethernet routing, and don't need
a full routing table, it's quite possible that the 3550 will perform
better than either the 6000/Sup1A or the 7505. You might also consider
a 3750, which handles a large number of SVIs better than the 3550.
(Yes, I'm seriously suggesting using the 3550 or 3750 alone.)
It is a great box. But I need BGP. I notice Cisco does not support 7505
with Software Advisor but does 7507 whats the deal with that ?
Alexander Hagen
Etheric Networks Incorporated, A California Corporation
527 Sixth Street No 371261
Montara CA 94037
Main Line: (650)-728-3375
Direct Line: (650) 728-3086
Cell: (650) 740-0650 (Does not work at our office in Montara)
Home: (Emgcy or weekends) 650-728-5820
fax: (650) 240-1750 http://www.etheric.net
Cisco Systems� announces the end of life of the Cisco� 7505 Series Router
chassis. Note: This end-of-life announcement does not affect the Cisco
7507 and 7513 chassis. The Cisco 7507 and 7513 will remain orderable. The
last day to order the Cisco 7505 is June 30, 2004. Customers will continue
to receive support from the Cisco Technical Assistance Center (TAC) until
June 30, 2009. Table 1 describes the end-of-life milestones, definitions,
and dates for the Cisco 7505. Table 2 lists the part numbers for affected
products
I'm not sure what you're trying to say
You asked why the Cisco website tool won't give you a 7505 as a config
option I replied that it's EOL - with a quote from Cisco website
All I see in the HTML table you sent is that the 7507(or 7513) is better
than a 7505 - is there a non-obvious point I missed ?
hmm; why do you keep questioning people how to run their own networks?
step 1. know the limits of your devices
step 2. know the limits and purpose of each routing protocols
step 3. test test test
step 4. does it work for you? if yes: do it, if no: don't
it may be entirely approprirate to have a L3 switch run bgp just for
internal / small number of prefixes, or for other reasons, depends
on the hardware limits and configuration of your topology.
getting back to the topic, 2950 switches can create dot1q vlan tags,
so can 3500. so can 2900XL but never tried myself..
I was surprised by the similarities between the 7507 and 7513. Why EOL
the one device that has a pleasing form factor ? There are MANY
providers who would be quite happy with ~ 600 mbps? That's a lot of
billings...
Alexander Hagen
Etheric Networks Incorporated, A California Corporation
I was surprised by the similarities between the 7507 and 7513. Why EOL
the one device that has a pleasing form factor ? There are MANY
providers who would be quite happy with ~ 600 mbps? That's a lot of
billings...
From past experience there is no way you can get a 7507 to switch 600Mbps..
As for EOL, not sure.. the only deployments I've seen lately of 75xx have been
as aggregators for WAN circuits and theres usually a GSR doing the work behind
it, perhaps people are still buying 7513s for their card capacity?
