RE: packet per second

From: Scott Morris (swm@emanon.com)
Date: Fri Jun 10 2005 - 09:16:04 GMT-3

• Next message: hin ccie: "distance OSPF command - is it good if the external value is"
• Previous message: Scott Morris: "RE: route filtering with wild-card mask"
• Maybe in reply to: Vishal Patel: "packet per second"
• Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] [ attachment ]

I believe all those entries are based of of 64-byte packets. It seems to be
an industry standard for a measuring stick, which of course never translates
properly into the "real" usage of a network!

Gotta love the marketing guys! :)

Scott
 

-----Original Message-----
From: nobody@groupstudy.com [mailto:nobody@groupstudy.com] On Behalf Of
Vishal Patel
Sent: Friday, June 10, 2005 12:30 AM
To: ccielab@groupstudy.com
Subject: packet per second

Hi group,

This is bit off the track ..

I was just going thru the datasheets of VIP 4-50 and VIP 4-80.

Well, it says

VIP 4 -50 can handle 140,000 pps
VIP 4 -80 can handle 170,000 pps

Does anyone have idea, what packet size Cisco considers as a yardstick, when
they mention these figures.

Thanks

Vishal

• Next message: hin ccie: "distance OSPF command - is it good if the external value is"
• Previous message: Scott Morris: "RE: route filtering with wild-card mask"
• Maybe in reply to: Vishal Patel: "packet per second"
• Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] [ attachment ]

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Wed Jul 06 2005 - 14:43:41 GMT-3