On 09/08/10 07:11, arulgobinath emmanuel wrote:
Dear All,
Anybody have tested these values (
http://www.cisco.com/web/partners/downloads/765/tools/quickreference/routerperformance.pdf)
, since 64bytes on 1841 doesn't give the provided results (30Mbps).
Regards,
Gobinath.
On Thu, Sep 2, 2010
2010 10:39:44 +0200
From: Elmar K. Bins e...@4ever.de
To: cisco-nsp@puck.nether.net
Subject: Re: [c-nsp] Cisco Routers: Performance benchmark
Message-ID: 20100902083944.gv35...@ronin.4ever.de
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
war...@gmail.com (Christopher J. Wargaski) wrote
: [c-nsp] Cisco Routers: Performance benchmark
On 9/1/2010 09:04, Christopher J. Wargaski wrote:
Thanks for posting the URL for the router performance matrix. Anyone
know of a similar matrix for switches (L2 L3) and firewalls?
Google cisco switch performance
~Seth
--- On Thu, 2/9/10, bored to death bored_to_deat...@yahoo.com wrote:
for example, RFC 2544 says you should give benchmark
results on traffic with
frame-sizes of 64, 128, 256, 512, 1024, 1518 byte. and in
theory if we have
combination of packets with different frame-sizes,
performance is
...so if we have test results with these
frame-sizes, we can be sure if the router we wanna buy can work under the
highest load of the passing traffic on our network or not.
maybe for pure forwarding, but what if you throws acls, qos, fw, ids,
nat, etc into the equation? enabling more features
, 2010 12:49 AM
To: Seth Mattinen; cisco-nsp@puck.nether.net
Subject: Re: [c-nsp] Cisco Routers: Performance benchmark
hi,
thank you all for your replies.
i didn't say ~90Mbit/s for 64Byte frame size is a bad thing (i said the low
value is of course because of very small frame-size). i didn't mean
war...@gmail.com (Christopher J. Wargaski) wrote:
Thanks for posting the URL for the router performance matrix. Anyone
know of a similar matrix for switches (L2 L3) and firewalls?
Have you tried s/router/switch/ in the URL?
Life can be so easy.
Not all as requested, but a start:
Thanks, Elmar. That *was* too easy and way too intuitive. (I did not
expect that from Cisco. ;-)
Humbly,
cjw
Date: Thu, 2 Sep 2010 10:39:44 +0200
From: Elmar K. Bins e...@4ever.de
To: cisco-nsp@puck.nether.net
Subject: Re: [c-nsp] Cisco Routers: Performance benchmark
Message-ID
.
From: Bøvre Jon Harald jon.harald.bo...@hafslund.no
To: bored to death bored_to_deat...@yahoo.com; cisco-nsp@puck.nether.net
cisco-nsp@puck.nether.net
Sent: Tue, August 31, 2010 1:46:24 PM
Subject: SV: [c-nsp] Cisco Routers: Performance benchmark
Not all as requested, but a start
-nsp@puck.nether.net cisco-nsp@puck.nether.net
Subject: Re: [c-nsp] Cisco Routers: Performance benchmark
Message-ID:
ddad8b0da9d507498fa5c8e55a387b9458a8a2d...@pe-113-241-001.hipad.no
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
Not all as requested, but a start:
http://www.cisco.com
On 9/1/10 7:55 AM, bored to death wrote:
hi,
thanks for the reply.
the document you pointed out
(http://www.cisco.com/web/partners/downloads/765/tools/quickreference/routerperformance.pdf)
was good for the start, thank you. but it was very limited.
it just had the result for switching
On Wed, 1 Sep 2010, bored to death wrote:
the document you pointed out
(http://www.cisco.com/web/partners/downloads/765/tools/quickreference/routerperformance.pdf)
was good for the start, thank you. but it was very limited.
it just had the result for switching of 64Byte frame packets, not any
On Wed, 1 Sep 2010, bored to death wrote:
as i know, the normal frame size of ordinary networks are 1500Bytes which is
very bigger than 64Byte. for example, in this document, the maximum switching
The average is definitely not 1500 bytes, more like 500-700 bytes. Most of
packets are either
On Wednesday, September 01, 2010 10:55:48 pm bored to death
wrote:
we have universal RFC 2544 for performance benchmarks of
network devices like routers , etc. i was wondering and
it's just a thought, shouldn't cisco or other vendors
give performance specifications of their products based
Hi,
On Wed, Sep 01, 2010 at 07:55:48AM -0700, bored to death wrote:
the document you pointed out
(http://www.cisco.com/web/partners/downloads/765/tools/quickreference/routerperformance.pdf)
was good for the start, thank you. but it was very limited.
it just had the result for switching of
On 9/1/2010 09:04, Christopher J. Wargaski wrote:
Thanks for posting the URL for the router performance matrix. Anyone
know of a similar matrix for switches (L2 L3) and firewalls?
Google cisco switch performance
~Seth
___
cisco-nsp mailing list
hi,
for my research, i was looking for some documents about performance
specifications and benchmarks of cisco routers, such as 2800 and 3800 series.
oddly, i couldn't find any good document about these aspects of routers, on
cisco website or by searching in google. the benchmark parameters
To: cisco-nsp@puck.nether.net
Subject: [c-nsp] Cisco Routers: Performance benchmark
hi,
for my research, i was looking for some documents about performance
specifications and benchmarks of cisco routers, such as 2800 and 3800
series.
oddly, i couldn't find any good document about these aspects
18 matches
Mail list logo
