RE: PBR on 6509 cpu utilization

The CPU on the 3BXL is easily good for 100 - 150Mbps in my experience - but
only if you packet sizes are standard Microsoft 1440 - 1480 MTU... I have
used it years back to get some stuff on an MPLS circuit intead of a vpn,
during a cutover, etc.

From: me you [mailto:anunda19_at_gmail.com]
Sent: Tuesday, October 09, 2012 3:27 PM
To: Joseph L. Brunner
Cc: CCIE GroupStudy
Subject: Re: PBR on 6509 cpu utilization

Yes, this is just a temp solution while we migrate a /18 from one network to
another, but keep all ip's reachable and advertiesed from a specific point,
but seperate from the default route.
On Tue, Oct 9, 2012 at 3:20 PM, Joseph L. Brunner
<joe_at_affirmedsystems.com<mailto:joe_at_affirmedsystems.com>> wrote:
PBR is not an enterprise or a high performance technology. At best it's a CPU
drive stop gap to an outage or other very short term fix.

I suggest you look at designing around needing PBR either through VRF-Lite or
some other upstream technology such as a 3 legged low latency firewall, like
Palo Alto.

thanks

-----Original Message-----
From: nobody_at_groupstudy.com<mailto:nobody_at_groupstudy.com>
[mailto:nobody_at_groupstudy.com<mailto:nobody_at_groupstudy.com>] On Behalf Of me
you
Sent: Tuesday, October 09, 2012 3:13 PM
To: CCIE GroupStudy
Subject: PBR on 6509 cpu utilization

Does anyone have experience running PBR on a 6509 sup 2 or sup 720. I would
like to run PBR but one of the reason not to run it is because it will spike
the CPU. Is there any validaly behind that claim? Is there any cisco doc's
that would list the case examples. I tried google but did not find anything
usefull. Our current CPU is 3% with a 1Gig uplink. I don't see how it will
increase the CPU that much. I think it is just B/S because people are afraid
of change.

Thanks
Rob

Blogs and organic groups at http://www.ccie.net<http://www.ccie.net/>
Received on Tue Oct 09 2012 - 19:29:42 ART