From: Matt Dexter (matt.dexter@motorola.com)
Date: Tue Feb 11 2003 - 04:39:40 GMT-3
3com originally came out with a 16 blade chassis and the fabric module went
in slot 8 with a redundant option in slot 9. The modules were just blade
versions of CoreBuilder 3500s, SuperStack 3900s and SuperStack 9300s, etc.
After the CB9000 16 blade version 3com came out with a 7 blade version and
it had one (non-redundant) 24 Gig fabric module. I think they had a 8 slot
version too that allowed redundant fabrics. Later they changed it to a 4000
series core switch (when they shutdown a ton of their production of
Corebuilders).
The original 3com CB9000 16 slot had 2 Gig per blade in slots 1 - 12 and 1
Gig per blade in slots 13 - 16 and 24 1 Gig ports for the cross bar. For
example ports 21 and 22 of blade 1 linked to ports 1 and 2 of the fabric.
In comparison a Cisco 6500 with SFM has 8 Gig per slot for each fabric
enabled blade. Taking full duplex and architecture into account those
numbers go up. Apples to apples its 2 Gig to each slot (most cases) vs 8
Gig to each slot. The 3com buffers and stores packets much differently than
the 6500 and having used both it appeared to me the Cisco 6500 moves data
faster.
If you look today at a 4007 you can get a 18 Gig or 48 Gig fabric. The 48
Gig fabric is probably the same fabric as the original 24 Gig fabric but
with the math done differently.
Regards,
Matt.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Ong Boon Hui" <ongbh@cet.st.com.sg>
To: <ccielab@groupstudy.com>
Sent: Monday, February 10, 2003 7:33 PM
Subject: OT: Anyone knew what is the backplane capacity for Corebuilder 9000
> Hi Group,
>
> Does anyone know what is teh backplane for CoreBuilder 9000 ?
>
> Rgds,
> Debarros
> .
.
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Sat Mar 01 2003 - 11:06:18 GMT-3