Re: WAY OT: DFCs vs CFCs with service modules

Thanks Carlos and Joseph. You both approached the question with the same
logic I did. I pinged some Cisco Internal resources and they drew the same
conclusions. For the time being, I don't see any reason to deviate from the
CFCs for the 6509s in question. I was kinda hoping they (or someone) had an
official document with the math on it but the result is already clear.

Charles Henson

                                                                                                                                  
  From: Carlos G Mendioroz <tron_at_huapi.ba.ar>
                                                                                                                                  
  To: "Joseph L. Brunner" <joe_at_affirmedsystems.com>
                                                                                                                                  
  Cc: "Charles.Henson_at_regions.com" <Charles.Henson_at_regions.com>, "ccielab_at_groupstudy.com" <ccielab_at_groupstudy.com>
                                                                                                                                  
  Date: 05/18/2010 07:52 PM
                                                                                                                                  
  Subject: Re: WAY OT: DFCs vs CFCs with service modules
                                                                                                                                  

The ACE has a larger BW, but nothing that much important. Both are
threaded though.

From what I understand, DFC buys you parallel PPSs, and make sense when
you have parallel paths, boosting 30Mpps of CFC to many times that.
But if all your traffic goes to the same exit (either of the service
modules) or comes from it, then you will not benefit from parallel paths.

I even doubt that the gains from pure threaded (compact) would be
noticeable in your case (30Mpps vs 15Mpps), although this is all from
analisys of the architecture and not from actual experience.

-Carlos

Joseph L. Brunner @ 18/05/2010 21:29 -0300 dixit:
> Considering these
>
>> FWSM or ACE
>
> Have a 5 Gbps bus speed, either of these cards could oversubscribe them
quite easily.... so if the CFC is 20Gbps (If I recall) aren't we asking
which
> .500 Magnum or .50AE Beowulf pops a water balloon better?
>
> -Joe
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: nobody_at_groupstudy.com [mailto:nobody_at_groupstudy.com] On Behalf Of
Charles.Henson_at_regions.com
> Sent: Tuesday, May 18, 2010 1:04 PM
> To: ccielab_at_groupstudy.com
> Subject: OT: WAY OT: DFCs vs CFCs with service modules
>
> All,
> Does anyone have any good docs on DFC performance gains over
CFCs
> specifically when associated with service modules? I have a setup where
80%
> of my inter-VLAN traffic traverses either an FWSM or ACE. Not port to
port
> directly where the DFC seems to be geared. I have found plenty of docs on
> CCO about the improvements in forwarding with L2 or L3 traffic but they
are
> specific to traffic that doesn't need to be processed by an on board
> service module. Anyone?
>
>
> Charles Henson
>
>
> Blogs and organic groups at http://www.ccie.net
>
> _______________________________________________________________________
> Subscription information may be found at:
> http://www.groupstudy.com/list/CCIELab.html
>
>
> Blogs and organic groups at http://www.ccie.net
>
> _______________________________________________________________________
> Subscription information may be found at:
> http://www.groupstudy.com/list/CCIELab.html
>
>
>
>
>
>
>

--
Carlos G Mendioroz  <tron_at_huapi.ba.ar>  LW7 EQI  Argentina
Blogs and organic groups at http://www.ccie.net