2600 vs 2600XM

Discussion in 'Cisco' started by SyberPenguin@gmail.com, Nov 11, 2006.

  1. Guest

    Ok, I have purchased a "Cisco T1 DSU/CSU WAN Interface Card
    (WIC-1DSU-T1-V2)" for a 2600 sereis router that I have. Now the cisco
    website specifaclly says the v1 version of the card supports both 2600
    and 2600xm, but the v2 table only shows the 2600xm. My qestions are is
    there a difference in the two routers? and if it is supported, how do I
    go about installing it? Any help would be great.
     
    , Nov 11, 2006
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. Make Guest

    > there a difference in the two routers? and if it is supported, how do I
    > go about installing it? Any help would be great.


    2600 vs 2600xm
    The recommended replacement products are the Cisco 2600XM routers introduced
    in May 2002. Customers are encouraged to migrate to the Cisco 2600XM models,
    which offer the same modular design and flexibility as the Traditional Cisco
    2600 routers, but in addition offer more functionality for the same list
    price! In direct comparison, the Cisco 2600XMs provide more value and
    functionality by providing the following:

    ..Up to 33% performance increase for processor-intensive services

    ..Increased default memory

    ..Increased maximum flash memory to 48MB

    ..Increased maximum SDRAM memory to 128MB

    ..Integrated 10/100 Fast Ethernet ports on all Cisco 2600XM models

    ..Mainline IOS with the support of 12.1(14) and 12.2(12), in addition to
    12.2(8)T1

    ..Same feature and module support as the Traditional Cisco 2600 models

    ..Cisco 2650XM and Cisco 2651XM models supported on a 12.1 mainline (12.1.14)

    ..Enhanced security and broadband 2600XM product bundles for lower solution
    costs and easier ordering (worldwide announcement made on August 12, 2002)

    In addition to increased functionality, the new Cisco 2600XM routers provide
    the same platform applications and functionality as the current traditional
    Cisco 2600s:

    ..A DC and RPS version of each model

    ..NEBs Level 3

    ..Same Module support, including Network Modules, WAN Interface Cards (WIC)
    and Advanced Integration Modules (AIM)

    ..Same chassis dimensions (1RU), power, environmental and regulator
    specifications
     
    Make, Nov 11, 2006
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. MC Guest

    Make wrote:
    >> there a difference in the two routers? and if it is supported, how do I
    >> go about installing it? Any help would be great.

    >
    > 2600 vs 2600xm
    > The recommended replacement products are the Cisco 2600XM routers introduced
    > in May 2002. Customers are encouraged to migrate to the Cisco 2600XM models,
    > which offer the same modular design and flexibility as the Traditional Cisco
    > 2600 routers, but in addition offer more functionality for the same list
    > price! In direct comparison, the Cisco 2600XMs provide more value and
    > functionality by providing the following:
    >
    > .Up to 33% performance increase for processor-intensive services
    >
    > .Increased default memory
    >
    > .Increased maximum flash memory to 48MB
    >
    > .Increased maximum SDRAM memory to 128MB
    >
    > .Integrated 10/100 Fast Ethernet ports on all Cisco 2600XM models
    >
    > .Mainline IOS with the support of 12.1(14) and 12.2(12), in addition to
    > 12.2(8)T1
    >
    > .Same feature and module support as the Traditional Cisco 2600 models
    >
    > .Cisco 2650XM and Cisco 2651XM models supported on a 12.1 mainline (12.1.14)
    >
    > .Enhanced security and broadband 2600XM product bundles for lower solution
    > costs and easier ordering (worldwide announcement made on August 12, 2002)
    >
    > In addition to increased functionality, the new Cisco 2600XM routers provide
    > the same platform applications and functionality as the current traditional
    > Cisco 2600s:
    >
    > .A DC and RPS version of each model
    >
    > .NEBs Level 3
    >
    > .Same Module support, including Network Modules, WAN Interface Cards (WIC)
    > and Advanced Integration Modules (AIM)
    >
    > .Same chassis dimensions (1RU), power, environmental and regulator
    > specifications
    >
    >
    >

    Most likely many others still have the non XM routers deployed, they are
    not that old. We have hundreds out there supporting our customer
    Extranets and we will run them until they die.
    That is the problem I have had with Cisco, trying to force people into
    the new technology when is not needed.
    I am still running Nortel ASN routers in many places, still code
    upgrades and still supported and still running great for the past ten years.
    Also I wish Cisco would take the approach Nortel did with their BayRS
    code, Still can run the latest code on the original ASN routers we have.
    Need to upgrade a Cisco and the code is too big to fit on older routers
    (not too old either). Nortel allows you to rebuild custom images from
    their code, it modular so can add and subtract features as needed (of
    course only features to the up to the level of code purchased)
    I was really hoping that Cisco would go this route with the newer routers.
     
    MC, Nov 11, 2006
    #3
  4. writes:
    >Ok, I have purchased a "Cisco T1 DSU/CSU WAN Interface Card
    >(WIC-1DSU-T1-V2)" for a 2600 sereis router that I have. Now the cisco
    >website specifaclly says the v1 version of the card supports both 2600
    >and 2600xm, but the v2 table only shows the 2600xm. My qestions are is
    >there a difference in the two routers? and if it is supported, how do I
    >go about installing it? Any help would be great.



    Yes, there is a difference between the 2600 and the 2600XM intrisicly.
    They are different boxes, not just an expanded memory capability.

    Sorry to say, the WIC-1DSU-T1-V2 won't work on the 2600, and never will.
    Been there, done that.

    It will work on the 2600XM with a new enough code load.

    Time to RMA the card, or think about swapping out the 2600 for a
    factory refurb 2801 or something.
     
    Doug McIntyre, Nov 11, 2006
    #4
  5. MC <> writes:
    >Most likely many others still have the non XM routers deployed, they are
    >not that old. We have hundreds out there supporting our customer
    >Extranets and we will run them until they die.
    >That is the problem I have had with Cisco, trying to force people into
    >the new technology when is not needed.


    But really, who's going to be writing device drivers for a box that
    has been EOL'd for almost 6 years?

    I see it more as a thing that they got the concepts right, and they
    are so usable still out in the field, but once you can't start
    sourcing the parts needed to build the things, you do have to move
    onto the next design.
     
    Doug McIntyre, Nov 12, 2006
    #5
  6. MC Guest

    Doug McIntyre wrote:
    > MC <> writes:
    >> Most likely many others still have the non XM routers deployed, they are
    >> not that old. We have hundreds out there supporting our customer
    >> Extranets and we will run them until they die.
    >> That is the problem I have had with Cisco, trying to force people into
    >> the new technology when is not needed.

    >
    > But really, who's going to be writing device drivers for a box that
    > has been EOL'd for almost 6 years?
    >
    > I see it more as a thing that they got the concepts right, and they
    > are so usable still out in the field, but once you can't start
    > sourcing the parts needed to build the things, you do have to move
    > onto the next design.
    >


    Last day to order these Cisco 2600 models was April 26, 2003, Support
    until April 26, 2008.
    The 2612 was EOL on January 24, 2006, Support until July 24, 2011

    Should be able to still order V1 replacements from most VAR's.
     
    MC, Nov 14, 2006
    #6
    1. Advertising

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

It takes just 2 minutes to sign up (and it's free!). Just click the sign up button to choose a username and then you can ask your own questions on the forum.
Similar Threads
  1. Donald Zelenak Jr.

    2600XM, Frame Relay, and High CPU Utilization

    Donald Zelenak Jr., Dec 4, 2003, in forum: Cisco
    Replies:
    5
    Views:
    1,451
    Donald Zelenak Jr.
    Dec 6, 2003
  2. Rob
    Replies:
    3
    Views:
    616
    AnyBody43
    May 11, 2004
  3. Randy Henson
    Replies:
    4
    Views:
    3,950
    Robert B. Phillips, II
    Nov 9, 2004
  4. Ned

    2600XM startup loop

    Ned, Aug 11, 2005, in forum: Cisco
    Replies:
    1
    Views:
    607
  5. Replies:
    2
    Views:
    848
Loading...

Share This Page