[12019] in North American Network Operators' Group
RE: perf #s for GRF vs 7500 Re: Anyone Deployed Ascend's GRF IP S
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Paul Peterson)
Wed Aug 27 04:53:17 1997
From: Paul Peterson <paulp@winterlan.com>
To: nanog@merit.edu
Date: Wed, 27 Aug 1997 01:40:42 -0700
Has anyone compared the figures or have any feelings regarding the Bay
Networks BCN ??
We are considering one over a Cisco 7513/RSP4 or a GRF.
Bay claims to hold the entire Internet routing table in just 4-6MB RAM
per BGP peer (I assume this is after convergence). They say that the
method in which they do this is proprietary. I am just wondering if it
is possible.....
TIA
Paul...
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Craig A. Huegen [SMTP:c-huegen@quadrunner.com]
> Sent: Tuesday, August 26, 1997 9:00 PM
> To: joseph j. kim
> Cc: Joe Shaw; nanog@merit.edu
> Subject: Re: perf #s for GRF vs 7500 Re: Anyone Deployed Ascend's
> GRF IP Switch?
>
> On Tue, 26 Aug 1997, joseph j. kim wrote:
>
> ==>So, who's numbers should we believe or feel are more appropriate to
> real
> ==>world situations?
> ==>
> ==>> Comparing GateD to IOS becomes more of a religious preference
> than
> ==>> anything else. I'm content knowing both, truth be told.
> ==>>
> ==>> > maybe someone can post some performance numbers.
>
> Tolly's report didn't use CEF/FIB switching, and used classical
> (centralized) switching. Ascend paid Tolly for the test anyway--the
> only
> *true* test would be one from Data Communications or similar.
>
> /cah
