Cisco lancerer 322 Tbps router

http://www.reddit.com/r/technology/comments/bb6o5/cisco_announces_new_322_terabits_per_second_router/c0lwfi5 skrev:

ok - in typical cisco style I think there are a TON of details that are glazed over which are required to understand before you take what they say as true.

First, in reading about their CRS platform (Here in PDF) - you can see that the CRS-1 has an upper backplane limit of 1.2 Tbps - on the 16 slot shelf. Usually for cisco to get the speeds they are talking about - they are really talking about aggregating many shelves together to make a multi-shelf core who's interconnected BACKPLANE is capable of routing in the many many Tbps range.

In order to get the 322 Tbps, if its anything like the CRS-1 with a limit of 72 shelves (chassis) linked with 8 fabric shelves you'd get the ~92 Tbps (and i think that might be typical cisco over-statement, but I am not sure (e.g. it may be half the capacity)

So in a really, really large environ - where you have regional DCs that you put several of these in as your core - it could work. However there are like MAYBE 3 - 5 customers with networks of that scale, with that budget, with that need. And I think that may be 2 or 3x generous.

So, if we assume that the shelf (which says starts at 90K (for the CRS-3) is 90K, and that the 'start' is a 4-slot shelf, we will assume the 16-slot shelf is ~140K. With the 16 slot shelf, you can have 1152 40-Gbps line cards. If we want this system to be non-blocking (in order to hit the marketing numbers Cisco is referring to, that would be a 4-port line card - so 4608 10-G ports. (considering I just deployed a DC with 2688 1Gb ports in distribution, it will be only a few DCs in the world that would need 40K 1GB ports (though they do have them in aggregate (Google)) (although thats the core DC with ~100 Racks, the overall DC has 1800 racks in it)

so assuming 140K for each shelf, 1152 line cards I'd say are in the 30K range?, 8 fabric shelves, SW lic and support (we'll just aggregate them as a %)

This would be the cost to deploy such a system:

* Chassis 72 $140,000 $10,080,000
* Fabric 8 $90,000 $720,000
* Line Cards 1152 $30,000 $34,560,000
* SFPs 4608 $500 $2,304,000
* $47,664,000
* Service SW etc: $20,000,000

So all-in-all youre looking at least over 60 million to deploy a system like that with service and few million per year in service and support. So - once again Cisco Marketing Fail.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carrier_Routing_System skrev:

While the device was in development, it was known by the code name of HFR, or Huge Fucking Router.[1] The marketing group later maintained this actually meant Huge Fast Router.[2] This code name was coined in the tradition of Cisco's previous service provider router, the GSR (12000-series), whose development code name was BFR, or Big Fucking Router.

HenrikH (5) skrev:

1 Gbps LAN revolutionerede jo heller ikke hjemmenetværket, hvor ofte bruger du lige hastigheder over 100 Mbps personligt derhjemme?

demolition (12) skrev:

Dagligt. Jeg har svært ved at afspille mine rippede bluray film fra min NAS med et rent 100 Mbps netværk, så jeg kører 1 Gbps over det hele. The Dark Knight hakker f.eks. lidt i det hvis jeg forsøger at afspille den over 100 Mbps, men den har også ret høj bitrate.

FeedMe (13) skrev:

Haha. 5.000 enheder. De må da snart gå nedenom og hjem Apple sælger millioner af iPods og lignende. 5.000 enheder? :D jeg griner stadig.

A-Vizion (16) skrev:

Den mindste af deres CRS-1 koster 450.000 USD... go figure :)

ZiN (14) skrev:

#6: Lur mig om ikke man sagde det samme om CRS-1'eren. :-)
Ny Internet Core router. Godt, godt. Det er altid en rar ting. :-)

A-Vizion (16) skrev:

Den mindste af deres CRS-1 koster 450.000 USD... go figure :)

A-Vizion (16) skrev:

Den mindste af deres CRS-1 koster 450.000 USD... go figure :)

Men det er da glædeligt, at der stadig er så markant udvikling på dette område. Jeg har for længe siden opgraderet mit LAN til Gbit, og jeg overfører ofte med 30-40 MB/s - altså væsentligt mere end hvad 100 Mbit kan følge med til.