[48058] in North American Network Operators' Group
RE: Cisco 7200 VXR with NPE-400 (was RE: The market must be coming back)
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Daniska Tomas)
Wed May 22 10:20:23 2002
content-class: urn:content-classes:message
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Date: Wed, 22 May 2002 16:18:14 +0200
Message-ID: <A44DA7EDD8262343B02C64AF7E063A0726E10B@kenya.ba.tronet.sk>
From: "Daniska Tomas" <tomas@tronet.com>
To: "Ralph Doncaster" <ralph@istop.com>
Cc: <nanog@merit.edu>
Errors-To: owner-nanog-outgoing@merit.edu
did you do netflow switching or cef + netflow accounting that time?
--
=20
Tomas Daniska
systems engineer
Tronet Computer Networks
Plynarenska 5, 829 75 Bratislava, Slovakia
tel: +421 2 58224111, fax: +421 2 58224199
=20
A transistor protected by a fast-acting fuse will protect the fuse by =
blowing first.
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Ralph Doncaster [mailto:ralph@istop.com]=20
> Sent: 22. m=E1ja 2002 16:15
> To: Heath_Dieckert@Dell.com
> Cc: nanog@merit.edu
> Subject: RE: Cisco 7200 VXR with NPE-400 (was RE: The market=20
> must be coming back)
>=20
>=20
>=20
> > Based on our testing it looks like it all has to do with=20
> packet size. With
> > small packets the throughput is very low. With what Cisco calls an
> > "internet mix" of packet sizes throughput is much better. =20
> When doing max
> > MTU packets, the throughput is of course the best. =20
>=20
> The other thing I've found about traffic type is how sensitive
> netflow is. I was running it for a while, then I got a co-lo customer
> that had a lot of UDP traffic with small packet sizes and=20
> rarely more than
> a few packets between the same src/dest ip/port (much like DNS
> queries). It was enough to flatline the box and cause it to crash.
>=20
> -Ralph
>=20
>=20
