>Great.. I saw some of the EOL for 7200s... made me worried a little..
>
[quoted text clipped - 9 lines]
>> I'd personally go with the 3745 as its a newer model, and more IOS
>> options may be available for it in the future(??)
>I would not use a 3745 if you're planning on expansion. Though Cisco
>claims a 3745 can handle two DS3s, our internal lab testing says
>otherwise. In fact, we've found that (depending on packet size,
>routing protocols used, and other factors) a 3745 can't quite drive a
>DS3 to full speed. In practice I've implemented a single DS3 and it
>works OK, but it makes me nervous.
Really? I am putting in a 3725 with a single DS3 here shortly. I was
under the impression it could handle one just fine. I guess I'll find
out.
-Robert
Steinar Haug - 16 Jul 2004 16:35 GMT
[Rob]
| Really? I am putting in a 3725 with a single DS3 here shortly. I was
| under the impression it could handle one just fine. I guess I'll find
| out.
As always - the difference between X Mbps of normal traffic and the
same amount of minimum-sized DoS traffic can be significant.
Steinar Haug, Nethelp consulting, sthaug@nethelp.no
Terry Baranski - 16 Jul 2004 23:45 GMT
>>I would not use a 3745 if you're planning on expansion. Though Cisco
>>claims a 3745 can handle two DS3s, our internal lab testing says
[quoted text clipped - 6 lines]
>under the impression it could handle one just fine. I guess I'll find
>out.
The 3725 can do over 200Mbps with full-sized packets and no
performance-reducing features enabled. But things change as packet
size decreases and processing-intensive features such as ACLs and NAT
are enabled. The performance you'll get is completely dependant on
these factors.
-Terry
Prince By-Tor - 17 Jul 2004 23:22 GMT
>>I would not use a 3745 if you're planning on expansion. Though Cisco
>>claims a 3745 can handle two DS3s, our internal lab testing says
[quoted text clipped - 6 lines]
>under the impression it could handle one just fine. I guess I'll find
>out.
Every situation is different, but when we stressed them in our labs
they did not hold up. Again, we're running BGP, using them in large
networks with potentially large routing tables, often doing ISDN, GRE
tunnels, NAT, whatever.
Also, are you doing ATM DS3 or something else? I suppose I should
have prefixed my comments...we use exclusively ATM at >T1.
Can't remember the numbers for the 3275, but we found the 3745 topped
out around 41 megabits. Not shabby, but still.
--chris
Rob - 19 Jul 2004 14:09 GMT
>Also, are you doing ATM DS3 or something else? I suppose I should
>have prefixed my comments...we use exclusively ATM at >T1.
[quoted text clipped - 3 lines]
>
>--chris
It's the standard clear channel E3/T3 interface for the 3700 series.
Not ATM. I hope you're wrong, no offense. It may be my job on the
line if it can't do 35Mb of a DS3. Damn Cisco marketing.
:(
Robert
Hansang Bae - 20 Jul 2004 05:29 GMT
[snip]
> Every situation is different, but when we stressed them in our labs
> they did not hold up. Again, we're running BGP, using them in large
[quoted text clipped - 6 lines]
> Can't remember the numbers for the 3275, but we found the 3745 topped
> out around 41 megabits. Not shabby, but still.
Adding GRE to the mix can be a deal breaker.

Signature
hsb
"Somehow I imagined this experience would be more rewarding" Calvin
*************** USE ROT13 TO SEE MY EMAIL ADDRESS ****************
********************************************************************
Due to the volume of email that I receive, I may not not be able to
reply to emails sent to my account. Please post a followup instead.
********************************************************************