2611XM dual port ethernet speed between ports

Discussion in 'Cisco' started by news, Mar 4, 2004.

  1. news

    news Guest

    Hi,
    I hope someone can help, as I have had conflicting info from Cisco pre
    sales my distributor and my tech guy.

    We are about to implement Cisco 2611XM routers in our data centre, they have
    2 x Ethernet 10/100 ports, but I have been told that they will only route
    10mb between the Ethernet ports (Cisco docs say 20kpps) and not 100mb this
    seemed not quite right as the ports are 10/100.

    Could someone clear this up for me, your help would be appreciated greatly.

    Regards in advance.
     
    news, Mar 4, 2004
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. news wrote:

    > We are about to implement Cisco 2611XM routers in our data centre, they have
    > 2 x Ethernet 10/100 ports, but I have been told that they will only route
    > 10mb between the Ethernet ports (Cisco docs say 20kpps) and not 100mb this
    > seemed not quite right as the ports are 10/100.
    >
    > Could someone clear this up for me, your help would be appreciated greatly.


    They'll do 20Kpps, which is roughly 10Mbps of minimum-sized (64-byte)
    packets.

    In practice, your average packet size will be larger, so the effective
    throughput will be higher. My own experience (as a data point) is ~300
    bytes average, so thats ~45Mbps. YMMV.

    If you expect to do 100 Mbps, get something beefier than a 2600XM; they
    aren't really up to it.

    Regards,

    Marco.
     
    M.C. van den Bovenkamp, Mar 4, 2004
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. news

    news Guest


    > > 2 x Ethernet 10/100 ports, but I have been told that they will only

    route
    > > 10mb between the Ethernet ports (Cisco docs say 20kpps) and not 100mb

    this
    > > seemed not quite right as the ports are 10/100.

    >
    > They'll do 20Kpps, which is roughly 10Mbps of minimum-sized (64-byte)
    > packets.
    >
    > In practice, your average packet size will be larger, so the effective
    > throughput will be higher. My own experience (as a data point) is ~300
    > bytes average, so thats ~45Mbps. YMMV.
    >
    > If you expect to do 100 Mbps, get something beefier than a 2600XM; they
    > aren't really up to it.


    Thank you for that, it looks like we may look at the 3600 instead, as one of
    the co-location customers started talking about steaming video this morning
    and I feel after what you have said, that the 2611 may well fall over, would
    you say that would be a better option?

    Cheers
     
    news, Mar 4, 2004
    #3
  4. news wrote:

    > Thank you for that, it looks like we may look at the 3600 instead, as one of
    > the co-location customers started talking about steaming video this morning
    > and I feel after what you have said, that the 2611 may well fall over, would
    > you say that would be a better option?


    One of the bigger 3600s would be a better option (a 3660 will do
    ~100Kpps). But if you want to route between Ethernets, have you thought
    of getting a L3-capable switch instead?

    *Far* more oomph for your buck; even something low-endish like a 3550-24
    will do 6.6Mpps/4.4Gbps (whichever is smaller in your environment)...

    Regards,

    Marco.
     
    M.C. van den Bovenkamp, Mar 4, 2004
    #4
  5. Hi,

    Routers are not like switches, they need to do a lot of processing on the
    packets in order to get them from port a to port b.

    The performance of the router depends on the number of operations that need
    to be done. So CPU horsepower determines the speed you can expect from a
    certain router. That's why Cisco sells all these different router models.
    The C2610 series has a less performant cpu than the C2620 series and so on.
    So CPU power determines speed, not the physical interface.
    If Cisco tells you the router can do 20kpps (optimal conditions) you can
    expect anywhere from 64bytes*20k bytes/s to 1500bytes*20k bytes/s
    throughput. Real-life experience (we have a Cisco 2620) says it won't go
    much faster than 10Mbps (we have several additional features enabled; packet
    filters/policy routing/...)

    Erik.


    "news" <karl dot prust at international-it dot co dot uk> wrote in message
    news:4047084c$0$22390$...
    > Hi,
    > I hope someone can help, as I have had conflicting info from Cisco pre
    > sales my distributor and my tech guy.
    >
    > We are about to implement Cisco 2611XM routers in our data centre, they

    have
    > 2 x Ethernet 10/100 ports, but I have been told that they will only route
    > 10mb between the Ethernet ports (Cisco docs say 20kpps) and not 100mb this
    > seemed not quite right as the ports are 10/100.
    >
    > Could someone clear this up for me, your help would be appreciated

    greatly.
    >
    > Regards in advance.
    >
    >
    >
     
    Erik Tamminga, Mar 4, 2004
    #5
  6. news

    James Guest

    The 2611 is a 2 port 10M device.
    The 2621 is a 2 port 10/100M device.
    XM means extended memory capabilities - required for the latest bloatware
    from Cisco

    "news" <karl dot prust at international-it dot co dot uk> wrote in message
    news:4047084c$0$22390$...
    > Hi,
    > I hope someone can help, as I have had conflicting info from Cisco pre
    > sales my distributor and my tech guy.
    >
    > We are about to implement Cisco 2611XM routers in our data centre, they

    have
    > 2 x Ethernet 10/100 ports, but I have been told that they will only route
    > 10mb between the Ethernet ports (Cisco docs say 20kpps) and not 100mb this
    > seemed not quite right as the ports are 10/100.
    >
    > Could someone clear this up for me, your help would be appreciated

    greatly.
    >
    > Regards in advance.
    >
    >
    >
     
    James, Mar 4, 2004
    #6
  7. James wrote:

    > The 2611 is a 2 port 10M device.
    > The 2621 is a 2 port 10/100M device.
    > XM means extended memory capabilities - required for the latest bloatware
    > from Cisco


    Please do not top post.

    The 2611XM is a 2 port 10/100Mbps device.


    B

    --
    http://www.mailtrap.org.uk/
     
    Bob { Goddard }, Mar 4, 2004
    #7
  8. On Thu, 4 Mar 2004 10:43:21 -0000, "news" <karl dot prust at
    international-it dot co dot uk> wrote:

    >Hi,
    > I hope someone can help, as I have had conflicting info from Cisco pre
    >sales my distributor and my tech guy.
    >
    >We are about to implement Cisco 2611XM routers in our data centre, they have
    >2 x Ethernet 10/100 ports, but I have been told that they will only route
    >10mb between the Ethernet ports (Cisco docs say 20kpps) and not 100mb this
    >seemed not quite right as the ports are 10/100.
    >
    >Could someone clear this up for me, your help would be appreciated greatly.


    A router can't necessarily route traffic at the full speed of a given
    interface. In the case of the 2600s it makes sense to put 100Mbit
    Ethernet interfaces on them because they can indeed route faster than
    10Mbit/sec, but they can't get to a full 100Mbit/sec.

    As someone mentioned, the bandwidth Cisco quoted you comes from their
    official packets-per-second ratings which are based on 64 byte
    packets. As packet size increases, experience shows that acheivable
    pps tends to decrease, but acheivable bandwidth increases because the
    packets are larger. The usual example I give is the 2621, rated at
    25kpps, which can do around 40Mbps with 1500 byte packets under
    optimal conditions (CEF, no ACLs or NAT, etc) per some testing that I
    did. Based on this, a rough estimation for a 2611XM's performance in
    such a scenario would be 30Mbps or so.

    But again, these numbers are optimal. Average packet size on any real
    network is usually much less than 1500 bytes, and performance
    decreases even further as various features such as ACLs and NAT are
    enabled. So you have to ballpark your bandwidth requirements and then
    figure out what router is appropriate based on the traffic profile of
    your network (e.g., average packet size) and any potential
    performance-reducing features that will be enabled on the router.
    It's by no means a science -- unfortunately, the only way to be
    positive about a device's performance in a given scenario is to test
    it yourself, which isn't always possible.

    -Terry
     
    Terry Baranski, Mar 4, 2004
    #8
  9. "news" <karl dot prust at international-it dot co dot uk> wrote in message
    news:4047084c$0$22390$...
    > Hi,
    > I hope someone can help, as I have had conflicting info from Cisco pre
    > sales my distributor and my tech guy.
    >
    > We are about to implement Cisco 2611XM routers in our data centre, they

    have
    > 2 x Ethernet 10/100 ports, but I have been told that they will only route
    > 10mb between the Ethernet ports (Cisco docs say 20kpps) and not 100mb this
    > seemed not quite right as the ports are 10/100.


    Hi,
    You are so much better of, if you choose multilayer switching over routing.
    Like a catalyst 2950 or 3550 or 3750.
    Theses fellows can surely rock at wirespeed fastethernet, since they switch.
    you simply tell one port what IP is has, and that it's not a switchport -
    then you have a "router" 8)

    HTH
    Martin Bilgrav
     
    Martin Bilgrav, Mar 4, 2004
    #9
  10. news

    Steinar Haug Guest

    ["Martin Bilgrav"]

    | > We are about to implement Cisco 2611XM routers in our data centre, they
    | have
    | > 2 x Ethernet 10/100 ports, but I have been told that they will only route
    | > 10mb between the Ethernet ports (Cisco docs say 20kpps) and not 100mb this
    | > seemed not quite right as the ports are 10/100.
    |
    | Hi,
    | You are so much better of, if you choose multilayer switching over routing.
    | Like a catalyst 2950 or 3550 or 3750.

    "Multilayer switching" is a marketing term. If it forwards based on the
    IP address, it's routing.

    Also, the 2950 cannot do any sort of routing - it's an L2 switch, pure
    and simple.

    | Theses fellows can surely rock at wirespeed fastethernet, since they switch.
    | you simply tell one port what IP is has, and that it's not a switchport -
    | then you have a "router" 8)

    I agree that the 3550 and 3750 are nice for what they can be used for.
    But they can't be used for everything - there are definitely things a
    2611XM can do that a 3550 or 3750 cannot. It all depends on your
    requirements.

    Steinar Haug, Nethelp consulting,
     
    Steinar Haug, Mar 4, 2004
    #10
    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. Peter
    Replies:
    2
    Views:
    1,097
  2. Jim Stewart
    Replies:
    10
    Views:
    1,030
    Jim Stewart
    Jun 29, 2004
  3. SteveB
    Replies:
    2
    Views:
    944
    SteveB
    Oct 10, 2006
  4. Replies:
    0
    Views:
    1,295
  5. gibsurfer84
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    1,046
    gibsurfer84
    Feb 1, 2009
Loading...

Share This Page