Hi,
On Fri, 21 Feb 2014, Blake Pfankuch - Mailing List wrote:
I would agree with Gert. We actually replaced some legacy equipment with 3925E
routers, which left me having to support a single DS3 and an ATM OC3. Since
then I have replaced these legacy circuits with a 200mbit Ethernet, and a
300mbit Ethernet link with no monthly cost change. Each carrier was happy to
upgrade the circuit with no contract changes or installation charges.
Ethernet connectivity is being pushed by the majority of the carriers I have
been working with and many of them will even have discussions about providing
redundant pathing into our facility going back to separate CO's. In the case
of Level3, they actually just included this free of charge which beats the heck
out of a single pathed DS3.
Reading between the lines of Gerts mail I saw the words "line rate" ...
I understand the carriers desire to offer various bandwidth options between
100mbit/s abd 1git/s.
I just don't fully trust their shaping/policing solutions to provide the
inbetween bandwidths.
Old school interfaces that had configurable clock rate did the right thing (tm)
out of the box.
Greetings
Christian
Thanks,
Blake
-----Original Message-----
From: cisco-nsp [mailto:cisco-nsp-boun...@puck.nether.net] On Behalf Of Gert
Doering
Sent: Thursday, February 20, 2014 6:39 AM
To: Alex Nyagah
Cc: cisco-nsp@puck.nether.net
Subject: Re: [c-nsp] SPA Module compatibility
Hi,
On Thu, Feb 20, 2014 at 11:18:40AM +0300, Alex Nyagah wrote:
I have Cisco 3900 series routers and i want to get E3 and DS3 lines
from a local provider. Which SPA cards are compatible with the 3900
routers. I have ordered
SPA-XT3/E3 but from the various sources am not sure it is compatible
with the router.
I will appreciate team advice..
There's good material on www.cisco.com about modules for cisco 3900 series...
http://bit.ly/1eWROEy
What you need is "NM-" modules.
In any way, I'd avise against going for E3/DS3 - of all line types we had, those are the
worst to troubleshoot, and also having the most weird issues (like "the signal from
the telco to our PA-2T3 being too hot and requiring 6dB attenuation").
*Also* the interfaces are just ridiculously expensive.
I'd go for 100Mbit ethernet (not sub-rate) if possible - in many cases this is
actually cheaper, as carriers who have seen the light are actually trying to
get rid of E3/T3 interfaces as well.
gert
--
USENET is *not* the non-clickable part of WWW!
//www.muc.de/~gert/
Gert Doering - Munich, Germany g...@greenie.muc.de
fax: +49-89-35655025 g...@net.informatik.tu-muenchen.de
_______________________________________________
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/
--
Christian Kratzer CK Software GmbH
Email: c...@cksoft.de Wildberger Weg 24/2
Phone: +49 7032 893 997 - 0 D-71126 Gaeufelden
Fax: +49 7032 893 997 - 9 HRB 245288, Amtsgericht Stuttgart
Mobile: +49 171 1947 843 Geschaeftsfuehrer: Christian Kratzer
Web: http://www.cksoft.de/
_______________________________________________
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/
