WAAS Deployment

Unanswered Question
May 13th, 2008
User Badges:

Hi! I am quite new here. I just wanted to ask if the design of our WAAS deployment is fine.


We currently have WAE-512-K9 applaince in our datacenters. And we have NME-WAE-302-K9 in our remote sites. Each DC have about 10 or more remote sites.


In other compression devices, the HUB device should be able to handle the load from its spokes. So I guess that the HUB must be a higher model than the remote end. Does this apply to WAAS device as well? Does our WAE-512 sufficient enough to handle those remote sites for compression?


By the way, the WAE-512 is connected to our VPN router (Cisco 2811) and we are running VPN tunnel to all our remote sites.


Thanks!

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Overall Rating: 0 (0 ratings)
Loading.
Zach Seils Tue, 05/13/2008 - 03:54
User Badges:
  • Cisco Employee,

Mike,


There are several different sizing aspects to consider, so it's hard to comment on the appropriateness of the WAE-512 as your aggregation device. Attributes you want to consider:


WAN Bandwidth

Concurrent TCP Connections

Overall Compression Ratio


How does the performance of the system look? What is the overall compression ratio you are seeing?


Zach



dstolt Tue, 05/13/2008 - 04:04
User Badges:
  • Cisco Employee,

Mike,


It's tough to tell without knowing how much TCP traffic you have on your network, but assuming the sizing was done correctly up front...


The NME-WAE-302s have roughly 55 GB of disk dedicated to DRE compression. A 512 w/2 GB RAM has 110 GB of disk for DRE. So if the edges are not pushed too hard, then yes, the core should be large enough.


If you see the 512 starting to get taxed (CPU 100%, DRE turning over ever few hours), then you can add a second box (with WCCP redirection) or upgrade the hardware (with Inline or PBR). If the 512 only has a single GB of RAM, then I would recommend upping it to at least 2 GB as well if you are seeing it pushed on resources.


Hope that helps,

Dan

Actions

This Discussion