I was just wondering if anyone new definitively what the difference is between the WS-F6K-PFC3B and WS-F6K-PFC3BXL module on the SUP720?
I know there are stated differences in the number of routes and Netflow entries etc that they can handle and the restrictions on the DFC?s, but I thought that this was a function of the amount of memory on the MSFC and Supervisor ? and you can upgrade the WS-SUP720-3b to 1GB on the SUP and MSFC.
So, will a memory upgraded 3B provide the same performance and functionality as a 3BXL?
The biggest difference we have seen between the 3B and 3BXL was the amount of BGP routes that can be handled. The internet routing table (my view) is over 215K. The 3B TCAM cannot handle that many IPv4 routes in hardware, causing the box to send anything above (192K) to the CPU. This caused our CPU's to spike with traffic. That's bad. There is a hack where you can increase the amount of supported IPv4 routes in the 3B, but, that robs the IPv6 and multicast routes.
On the other hand, the TCAM on the 3BXL supports 1Million IPv4 + multicast + IPv6. By default the BXL supports 512K BGP IPv4 routes.
From a netflow perspective, both the 3B and 3BXL suck and still have a itty bitty ASIC that doesn't come close to what we need. It would be really nice if they would increase that ASIC size because 256K slots in the table for netflow is vastly undersized, especially considering when you turn on netflow on the box it turns it on for /every/ interface and sampling doesn't sample INTO the table, it samples OUT of the table. Hope this helps...