Re: [c-nsp] Typhoon support on XRe

On 5/2/17 8:22 AM, James Jun wrote: > > To be honest, MX104 seems kind of same story on Juniper land, it was cool to > see modular RE back when it was introduced and product seemed to have good > potential on design overall, but at this point, I think it's best to wait for > the upcoming

Re: [c-nsp] Typhoon support on XRe

On 5/1/17 7:24 PM, Saku Ytti wrote: > Clearly home users aren't driving 10GE, 100GE, 400GE demand, and I > don't anticipate this changing soon. Perhaps vendors still think > market is same as it was 5-10 years ago, where everyone wanted faster > connection on every cycle, but we're now in era

Re: [c-nsp] Typhoon support on XRe

On 5/1/17 7:24 PM, Saku Ytti wrote: > Warning largely content free pondering follows. > > This is not XR specific, market is no longer driven by service > providers/access networks, but by content networks. And content > networks want ever faster interfaces in ever denser form factor. > 1GE is

Re: [c-nsp] Typhoon support on XRe

> Mikael Abrahamsson [mailto:swm...@swm.pp.se] > Sent: Thursday, May 04, 2017 1:23 PM > > On Thu, 4 May 2017, adamv0...@netconsultings.com wrote: > > I have been told this before purchase. "worst case performance with all > features turned on, is X bytes wirespeed. Less features, higher pps. if

Re: [c-nsp] Typhoon support on XRe

On Thu, 4 May 2017, adamv0...@netconsultings.com wrote: Well people don't care about a lot of things, like how routers actually work or whether they can still protect your EF traffic when overloaded, and that's not necessarily a good thing even though everyone does it. But I guess you're right,

Re: [c-nsp] Typhoon support on XRe

> Mikael Abrahamsson [mailto:swm...@swm.pp.se] > Thursday, May 04, 2017 11:39 AM > > On Tue, 2 May 2017, adamv0...@netconsultings.com wrote: > > > Oh dear, 16.67Mpps budget per 10GE is now acceptable? We're doomed. > > So I'd say the market has spoken, people don't care about wirespeed >

Re: [c-nsp] Typhoon support on XRe

On Tue, 2 May 2017, adamv0...@netconsultings.com wrote: Oh dear, 16.67Mpps budget per 10GE is now acceptable? We're doomed. This has been in the making for a long time. There have been plenty of offerings where the line rate min-packet size kept creeping up and up. Cisco 12000 wasn't

Re: [c-nsp] Typhoon support on XRe

> James Bensley > Sent: Tuesday, May 02, 2017 10:28 AM > > On 2 May 2017 at 09:47, wrote: > > Oh dear, 16.67Mpps budget per 10GE is now acceptable? We're doomed. > > Line-rate 10Gbps@L2(64B)@L1(84B) is 29.761Mpps (both directions) > > -that's what I'd expect the

Re: [c-nsp] Typhoon support on XRe

On 2 May 2017 at 09:47, wrote: > Oh dear, 16.67Mpps budget per 10GE is now acceptable? We're doomed. > Line-rate 10Gbps@L2(64B)@L1(84B) is 29.761Mpps (both directions) -that's > what I'd expect the modern 100GE LCs to deliver, not that I'd like to > forward 64B

Re: [c-nsp] Typhoon support on XRe

On 2 May 2017 at 09:22, James Jun wrote: Hey James, > After all, once the 9901 is out, what purpose is there for 9001 to stick > around > for new revenue opportunities? Future seems bleak for 9001. > > To be honest, MX104 seems kind of same story on Juniper land, it was

Re: [c-nsp] Typhoon support on XRe

> Tom Hill > Sent: Monday, May 01, 2017 9:21 PM > > > Looking at the GPL, the new 24x10G/1G card is a bit cheaper than the > > equivalent Typhoon 24x10G card, and takes noticeably less power, as > > there is single NPU and FIA complex driving the whole card. So it > > does seem like cost

Re: [c-nsp] Typhoon support on XRe

On Mon, May 01, 2017 at 11:11:54PM +0200, Christian wrote: > The tomahawk based card is not much cheaper. Our traffic didn't increase > much over the last years, so it's hard to effort these expensive high > dense cards at the moment. So pretty bad time to invest into Cisco gear > here at the

Re: [c-nsp] Typhoon support on XRe

On 01/05/17 22:21, Tom Hill wrote: The 24x10G Typhoon card was always an expensive sod, but the oversubscription (in terms of PPS) was very, very low. A good card if you're taking on a lot of DoS traffic regularly, but part of the reason it's so damned expensive. The tomahawk based card is

Re: [c-nsp] Typhoon support on XRe

Hi James, On 01/05/17 18:29, James Jun wrote: > Yep, the Powerglide LCs are out and shipping now supposedly: > > http://www.cisco.com/c/en/us/products/collateral/routers/asr-9000-series-aggregation-services-routers/datasheet-c78-738704.html Ah-ha! Good spot. > It says line card supports LAN

Re: [c-nsp] Typhoon support on XRe

> > I'm pretty sure: > > - 32-bit IOS-XR will be here for a long time > > - you can use 10G MPA's in Tomahawk based MOD's > > There's a fixed 48x10G Tomahawk LC coming, which was in BRKARC-2003 at > the last CLEUR/CLUS (I forget which). Yep, the Powerglide LCs are out and shipping now

Re: [c-nsp] Typhoon support on XRe

On 1 May 2017 at 15:09, Christian wrote: Hey, > So XR has no future for <100G kit? Warning largely content free pondering follows. This is not XR specific, market is no longer driven by service providers/access networks, but by content networks. And content networks

Re: [c-nsp] Typhoon support on XRe

Hi Frederic, On 01/05/2017 16:02, frederic.jut...@sig-telecom.net wrote: Why dead QNX ? Dead for Cisco (seam that the automobile manufacturer are using QNX) ? Dead because of the late support of 64bits platforms ? dead because of everyone putting it's expenditures into Linux, and so also

Re: [c-nsp] Typhoon support on XRe

On 01/05/17 14:20, Christian wrote: >> IOS XR 6.x *DOES* support Typhoon, just not in the 64-bit flavor. > > yeah, based on dead QNX It doesn't magically stop working after 5.3.4. :) >> So XR has no future for <100G kit? > > I'm pretty sure: > - 32-bit IOS-XR will be here for a long time > -

Re: [c-nsp] Typhoon support on XRe

Hi Christian, On 01.05.2017 15:20, Christian wrote: > Hey, > > On 01/05/17 15:12, Lukas Tribus wrote: >>> Seriously? I thought only Trident cards ended support in 5.3.X. >> >> IOS XR 6.x *DOES* support Typhoon, just not in the 64-bit flavor. > > yeah, based on dead QNX, not with Linux and LXC

Re: [c-nsp] Typhoon support on XRe

Hey, On 01/05/17 15:12, Lukas Tribus wrote: Seriously? I thought only Trident cards ended support in 5.3.X. IOS XR 6.x *DOES* support Typhoon, just not in the 64-bit flavor. yeah, based on dead QNX, not with Linux and LXC architecture. -- Christian Meutes - Wiesbaden, Germany JESK-RIPE -

Re: [c-nsp] Typhoon support on XRe

> Seriously?  I thought only Trident cards ended support in 5.3.X.  IOS XR 6.x *DOES* support Typhoon, just not in the 64-bit flavor. Lukas ___ cisco-nsp mailing list cisco-nsp@puck.nether.net https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nsp

Re: [c-nsp] Typhoon support on XRe

Seriously? I thought only Trident cards ended support in 5.3.X. On May 1, 2017 8:52 AM, "Lukas Tribus" wrote: Hello Christian, > does someone know for sure that XRe will never support Typhoon based > linecards? Yes (to my surprise), IOS XR 64bit does not support Typhoon

Re: [c-nsp] Typhoon support on XRe

Hello Christian, > does someone know for sure that XRe will never support Typhoon based > linecards? Yes (to my surprise), IOS XR 64bit does not support Typhoon linecards: https://supportforums.cisco.com/discussion/13204931/supported-hardware-ios-xr-612-release-note#comment-11822371 > So

[c-nsp] Typhoon support on XRe

Hi list, does someone know for sure that XRe will never support Typhoon based linecards? So XR has no future for <100G kit? Thanks Christian -- Christian Meutes - Wiesbaden, Germany JESK-RIPE - tel:+49.176.32370305 ___ cisco-nsp mailing list