On Sun, 12 Jul 2020 at 12:45, Radu-Adrian FEURDEAN <cisco-...@radu-adrian.feurdean.net> wrote:
> > then also say Juniper MX, PTX are not hardware, Cisco 8k is > > not hardware, Jericho2 isn't hardware, modern stuff tends to run off > > of DRAM, not TCAM. > > Most of them can definitely do more than dumb packet forwarding, but not so > much as to do LNS or CGN in the main NPU (whatever variety the NPU is). A1k > OTOH is THE platform to be used if you want to do LNS and CGN with Cisco. I don't know where you base this claim, and I believe it's wrong. I know Trio could do any of this, I think Cisc8k could, and I'm fairly certain PTX1k could not. Both Trio and Ciscd8k are run-to-completion, you run ucode on the NPU and you're only limited by time. Perhaps your instruction set isn't conducive towards CGN or LNS, meaning you need too many cycles to do the feature, but certainly it could be done. > As for TCAM vs *RAM, lack of TCAM signals a FIB scale significantly larger > than a full table at the moment the box was designed. > Back to the question, NCS540 is merchant ASIC, while A1K is custom > network-oriented processor. I'd expect FIB scale to be a few (~4-5) times > higher on A1K than on NCS540. J2 is merchant and does DRAM, so that doesn't seem to be a signal either. -- ++ytti _______________________________________________ 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/
