Equipment for Fiber links & BGP

Unanswered Question
Aug 24th, 2009

I am looking for a lowest cost solution to terminate two BGP links into my Data center.

One of our Major partner needs to access their servers (hosted in our environment) and dont want to use VPN.

They want to use two dedicated links from their two Datacenters at different locations and will use BGP over these links.

The dedicated links will use Single mode fiber.

I have narrowed down to the following options

Option 1#

Two cisco 2811 routers

Two HWIC-1GE-SFP modules

&

Two GLC-LH-SM SFPs

Option 2#

Two Cisco Catalyst 3560-24TS (with IP Services software feature set (IPS))

Two GLC-LH-SM SFPs

This dedicated link will be utilized by only 5-10 users and there is QOS needed.

Now my questions

1. Are both the above options valid?

2. I am more inclined toward option#2 , any reason why I should think otherwise?

3. With Enterprise image on 3560 will I loose any BGP functionality?

Thanks

I have this problem too.
0 votes
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Overall Rating: 0 (0 ratings)
Loading.
Paolo Bevilacqua Mon, 08/24/2009 - 14:05

You can also consider the 8-port 3560, small and efficient.

BGP it's not an issue, If I understand correctly it will not be very busy in doing that,

Joseph W. Doherty Mon, 08/24/2009 - 15:56

How hard are you hoping to push this gig link? (For software routers, to truly provide gig, you would look toward the high performing end of the 7200 series [or perhaps a 7301].)

What are your QoS feature requirements? (QoS on 3560 is much less feature rich vs. software router. Metro switch, e.g. ME 3750, might be a better choice depending on what you need.)

#1 2811 might not support the level of performance desired.

#2 3560 might not support the level of QoS desired.

#3 For a 3560, there isn't an "Enterprise" image like there is with the software routers. The 3560's Service image probably supports all the basic BGP features. (BTW, I believe, there were 3 feature levels, but with current 3560 software the top two have been combined.)

hdave2912 Mon, 08/24/2009 - 17:00

The links will only be carrying less than 1Mb/sec data (even this rate will be inconsistent, mostly the links will be idle).

No QOS is required.

Joseph W. Doherty Tue, 08/25/2009 - 03:15

For only 1 Mbps, even a smaller ISR, as the 2801, should be fine. Further, if other smaller routers support BGP(?), you might be able to go even smaller, e.g. 1841 or 1861. (NB: There's conflicting info on the HWIC-1GE-SFP, a Q&A says you need a 2811 or better, but datasheet has: "Note: Cisco 1841 and Cisco 2801 minimum IOS release support in 12.4(15)T9 and above. Cisco 1861 minimum IOS release support in 12.4(20)T3 and above.")

In your original post you note ". . . and there is QOS needed." and in your follow up post you note "No QOS is required."???

If QoS isn't needed, nor gig facing inward, Paolo's suggestion of the 8 port 3560 is excellent. Even if the expected utilization is low, the L3 switch could easily handle gig bursts.

PS:

Something else to note about the HWIC port

"Q. What is the maximum throughput on the Gigabit Ethernet HWIC?

A. The HWIC bus interface is limited to 400 Mbps of full duplex. The actual throughput of the Gigabit Ethernet HWIC is limited by the throughput of individual platforms. Under bidirectional traffic of 1518 bytes or larger, the Gigabit Ethernet HWIC can support up to an aggregate of 350 Mbps on Cisco 2811 and 2821 routers, 400 Mbps on Cisco 2851 routers, and 500 Mbps on Cisco 3800 Series platforms."

References:

Q&A: http://cisco.com/en/US/prod/collateral/routers/ps5854/prod_qas0900aecd80169bf0.html

Datasheet: http://cisco.com/en/US/prod/collateral/routers/ps5854/product_data_sheet0900aecd8016be8d.html

Actions

This Discussion