Mark Tinka wrote: > On Wednesday 09 April 2008, Gert Doering wrote: > >> Indeed. Worse, they are now building increasingly >> different chassis types with different capabilities - >> 6500-E with "lots of power", and 7600-S with "nice and >> shiny high-availability EOBC" (if I understand the >> differences right). > > What I would really like is to run the RSP720-3CXL on our > 6500's. At the moment, if one wants to run -3CXL mode
Agreed; the CPU on the sup720 is laughably puny. Hell, even the one on the RSP720 isn't that fast, but at least it's an improvement. > across the entire chassis, 6500's will only support the > VS-S720-10G-3CXL (which, as Janos pointed out, isn't even > supported on the 7600). As much as the new supervisor is > touting VSS, we really don't need that today, but could use I note with concern that the Cisco product page lists the VSS as a different "product" to the base 6500. Ordinarily such a minor thing would not concern me, but as Gert has pointed out repeatedly, Cisco have made people very nervous about the 6500/7600 roadmap... > the extra horsepower/features available on the card. > > Let us hope the upcoming switch fabric will be supported on > both platform types. Ho ho. I doubt that very much. > > Alternatively, if it's not at all too impossible, Cisco > could craft a daughter -3CXL card for the SUP720-3BXL so we > can get -3CXL functionality with a simple supervisor module > PFC upgrade. I was under the impression the PFC is not an FRU. _______________________________________________ cisco-nsp mailing list cisco-nsp@puck.nether.net https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nsp archive at http://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-nsp/