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

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

For an introduction to the new site, click here. And see here for current known issues.

New Member

Small packet size and full BGP table

Hi All,

I need some advice. I'm looking for a Cisco device to run a full BGP table with a 60Mb link. And one of the main restrictions is that my traffic is almost 100% real-time (voip). So the average packet size is small. Today we own a Cisco 7204 NPE400 with 512Mb RAM. I think even though I upgrade it to a G2, due to the small average packet size, the router will be near to its limit. What do you guys suggest as a cost effective option? Maybe a Cisco 7300 NSE-150? Or should I think about a switch? Which one could support this?

Thanks in advance

Ralph

Everyone's tags (4)
3 REPLIES
Silver

Small packet size and full BGP table

We had an issue in the past that had a similar issue but the traffic was mainly VPN traffic but had 3500 sites connected to it.  We used the ASR line for this purpose.

http://www.cisco.com/en/US/partner/products/ps9343/prod_models_comparison.html

New Member

Re: Small packet size and full BGP table

Hi Raph,

There are a few ways you can approach this, Get a router than can hande more PPS (Like Rick suggested). Or get another router and use a per flow load balancing selection, this is dependant on your setup of course.

So you may have to think about it on your current setup, per packet you can't do with Voip. But per flow / per session should be fine.

I just set up an MPLS network (Mostly SCCP / RTP traffic), one of the sites was getting hammered with traffic. I decided to go down this route and all is better now

Regards,

Danny

Super Bronze

Re: Small packet size and full BGP table

Disclaimer

The     Author of this posting offers the information contained within this     posting without consideration and with the reader's understanding  that    there's no implied or expressed suitability or fitness for any   purpose.   Information provided is for informational purposes only and   should not   be construed as rendering professional advice of any kind.   Usage of  this  posting's information is solely at reader's own risk.

Liability Disclaimer

In     no event shall Author be liable for any damages whatsoever   (including,   without limitation, damages for loss of use, data or   profit) arising  out  of the use or inability to use the posting's   information even if  Author  has been advised of the possibility of  such  damage.

Posting

Nominally, the NPE-G2 offer fives times the performance of your NPE-400.  It should be able to easily deal with up to a 100 Mbps link.

The NSE-150 can offer more performance, but much depends on what's accelerated.  (I've used a NSE-100 side-by-side with a NPE-G1, the former did have lower average CPU utilization for the same load.)  I think the NSE-150 is End of Something.

If you looking to buy new, least expensive option would be a L3 switch, but you'll need to carefully check you're not giving up features important to you.

Depending on how much bandwidth you need to be able to grow into, the 39xxE might be a good choice.  Cisco recommends at 3925E for up to 250 Mbps and ad 3945E for up to 350 Mbps, and their recommendations are generally conservative.

929
Views
0
Helpful
3
Replies
CreatePlease login to create content