Cisco Support Community
Showing results for 
Search instead for 
Did you mean: 

Welcome to Cisco Support Community. We would love to have your feedback.

For an introduction to the new site, click here. If you'd prefer to explore, try our test area to get started. And see here for current known issues.

New Member

Catalyst 6509-E Supervisor Question


I'm currently in the process of evalutating potential equipment options for a Core Router/Switch that will be running BGP with several Tier 1 ISP's, the table download from each ISP will be full (300,000+ Routes).

I was looking at a 6509-E with dual SUP720-3BXL superivsors but after reading the below link I'm a little concerned by the maximum routes table:

Do I have to go to the VS based 720 supervisor as a minimum to support full BGP on a 6509-E?

Does anyone have any experience of the above switch + supervisor combination under a full BGP table, how well does it work? I'm looking at long term using this as a consolidated core (i.e. a VRF for the Global Internet routing table + a VRF for internal datacentre traffic, plus maybe some more shared VRF's).

Would I be better keeping a Core switch by itself and just buying edge routers to run BGP?


Everyone's tags (4)
VIP Super Bronze

Catalyst 6509-E Supervisor Question


If this is for a new deployment with 300.000 routes, I would look at Sup-2T, from what I understand the price for a 2T is the same as 720-VS or very close to it. For 720-VS the processor is only 600Mhz vs the 2T is duel core at 1.5Ghz each.

Also memory can go up to 4Gig on 2T

Have a look at table-8


New Member

Re: Catalyst 6509-E Supervisor Question

Hi Reza,

I had a feeling that would be the answer, I'll have to get a price for a pair of the 2T's and see how they compare to the pricing i have already for the SUP720-3BXL's.

Makes me wonder though if it would be sensible to just keep edge routers with decent CPU's & Memory aka 7201VXR's (NPE-G2) to run the full BGP at the edge and just keep the core switching seperate.

Any advice?