What equipment needed for DS3?

Discussion in 'Cisco' started by SysAdmin, Oct 26, 2003.

  1. SysAdmin

    SysAdmin Guest

    Hi All.

    What exact equipment would I need to place on both ends of a DS3?

    On side A it would be an Ethernet 10MB handoff routing 2 class C blocks
    over a DS3 to side B.

    Side B is a few webservers, dialup modem pools, wireless customers,
    ethernet customers, etc.

    I want to use Cisco but have little experience with it. Need something
    reliable and affordable.

    Also, its important to have 100MB ethernet interfaces on both side
    because I might bump this to 100MB if necessary.

    Thank you!!
     
    SysAdmin, Oct 26, 2003
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. On Sun, 26 Oct 2003 13:23:27 -0500, SysAdmin wrote:
    > Hi All.
    >
    > What exact equipment would I need to place on both ends of a DS3?
    >
    > On side A it would be an Ethernet 10MB handoff routing 2 class C blocks
    > over a DS3 to side B.
    >
    > Side B is a few webservers, dialup modem pools, wireless customers,
    > ethernet customers, etc.
    >
    > I want to use Cisco but have little experience with it. Need something
    > reliable and affordable.
    >
    > Also, its important to have 100MB ethernet interfaces on both side
    > because I might bump this to 100MB if necessary.


    The cheapest is probably a 3725 with a NM-1A-DS3 in each end, a
    more scaleable solution would be a 7200 with PA-T3, with this solution
    you would also not have the ATM overhead of about 10-15%

    --
    Jesper Skriver, CCIE #5456, FreeBSD committer
     
    Jesper Skriver, Oct 26, 2003
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. In article <>,
    SysAdmin <> wrote:
    : What exact equipment would I need to place on both ends of a DS3?

    Others will need to chime in with the finer nuances, as I have no DS3
    experience myself.

    : On side A it would be an Ethernet 10MB handoff routing 2 class C blocks
    :eek:ver a DS3 to side B.

    : Side B is a few webservers, dialup modem pools, wireless customers,
    :ethernet customers, etc.

    : I want to use Cisco but have little experience with it. Need something
    :reliable and affordable.

    : Also, its important to have 100MB ethernet interfaces on both side
    :because I might bump this to 100MB if necessary.

    You can get DS3 modules for the Cisco 2600 and 3600 series, which are
    relatively low end for Cisco. I notice, though, that all of the DS3
    options listed for Cisco equipment are listed as being ATM network
    modules. The 2600/3600 will handle the modules, but the implication
    is that your line is going to have to be provisioned as ATM, which
    surely will be fairly expensive.

    http://www.cisco.com/univercd/cc/td/doc/pcat/atne__p2.htm


    Are you going to be running voice or video over the line? If you are
    not planning to do so, then it might be a lot more cost
    effective to go with a fast packet-switched fibre option that doesn't
    promise in-hour packet delivery.

    DS3 is 44.736 Mbps, but you plan to feed it with 10 Mbps, and you made
    no mention of multimedia. Hmmm. What factors led you to DS3 instead
    of other technologies?

    I don't have any current prices for DS3 service, but the last time we
    had DS3 (about 3 years ago), the price was about $US5000 per month,
    which is about 4 times the price of a Cisco 2621 router itself (about
    $US1700). The NM-1A-T3 DS3 adapter will cost you about $US4300, so
    you are looking at about $US6000 per end for the equipment,
    giving you a First Year running cost up to about $US72000 (obviously
    highly dependant on the DS3 costs.)

    The phrasing of your posting somehow suggests to me that you have
    LAN experience, but that you might not have much WAN experience,
    and aren't expecting anything even -close- to the costs I've just noted.
    When you are working with DS3, the question usually isn't "reliable
    and affordable" -- the question is usually something more like
    "QoS and VOIP and dual power supplies and HSRP and redundancy and latency
    less than so-many milliseconds -- oh, and it would be nice if it doesn't
    cost 7 arms and 10 legs, but we *need* these features and we'll pay whatever
    it takes."

    If you just want "a fast link" then there are often alternatives that
    might cost considerably less. For example, we saved an amazing amount
    by going gigabit fibre... but we don't have any multimedia traffic
    worth mentioning.
    --
    Suppose there was a test you could take that would report whether
    you had Free Will or were Pre-Destined. Would you take the test?
     
    Walter Roberson, Oct 26, 2003
    #3
  4. On 26 Oct 2003 19:10:52 GMT, Walter Roberson wrote:
    >
    > You can get DS3 modules for the Cisco 2600 and 3600 series, which are
    > relatively low end for Cisco. I notice, though, that all of the DS3
    > options listed for Cisco equipment are listed as being ATM network
    > modules. The 2600/3600 will handle the modules, but the implication
    > is that your line is going to have to be provisioned as ATM, which
    > surely will be fairly expensive.
    >
    > http://www.cisco.com/univercd/cc/td/doc/pcat/atne__p2.htm


    No, it's no problem to use ATM interfaces on a regular p2p DS3
    line, it's a bit transparent link, and the ATM cells is just
    payload - but it will give some overhead, 10-15%.

    > Are you going to be running voice or video over the line? If you are
    > not planning to do so, then it might be a lot more cost effective
    > to go with a fast packet-switched fibre option that doesn't promise
    > in-hour packet delivery.


    What do you mean with " fast packet-switched fibre option" ?

    --
    Jesper Skriver, CCIE #5456, FreeBSD committer
     
    Jesper Skriver, Oct 26, 2003
    #4
  5. In article <>,
    Jesper Skriver <> wrote:
    :On 26 Oct 2003 19:10:52 GMT, Walter Roberson wrote:

    :> Are you going to be running voice or video over the line? If you are
    :> not planning to do so, then it might be a lot more cost effective
    :> to go with a fast packet-switched fibre option that doesn't promise
    :> in-hour packet delivery.

    :What do you mean with " fast packet-switched fibre option" ?

    Gah, what did I mean by "in-hour packet delivery" ? ;=)

    I meant something like a burstable ethernet-over-fibre link, or
    a gigabit ethernet-over-fibre link. And I meant "in-order packet
    delivery" (DS3 is synchronous point-to-point, some of the alternatives
    are not.)
    --
    The Knights Of The Lambda Calculus aren't dead --this is their normal form!
     
    Walter Roberson, Oct 26, 2003
    #5
  6. On 26 Oct 2003 19:10:52 GMT, -cnrc.gc.ca (Walter
    Roberson) wrote:

    >You can get DS3 modules for the Cisco 2600 and 3600 series, which are
    >relatively low end for Cisco. I notice, though, that all of the DS3
    >options listed for Cisco equipment are listed as being ATM network
    >modules. The 2600/3600 will handle the modules, but the implication
    >is that your line is going to have to be provisioned as ATM, which
    >surely will be fairly expensive.


    There are non-ATM T3 modules for these routers. This one has an
    integrated DSU:
    http://www.cisco.com/en/US/products/hw/routers/ps282/products_data_sheet09186a008010fba2.html

    I had thought there was one without an integrated DSU, but perhaps it
    was the ATM one I was thinking of. There are also HSSI boards
    available for these routers, but I've never been clear on whether or
    not they can handle an entire full-duplex DS-3.

    Important to note is that, per Cisco, the 3745 is the lowest-end
    router that can route at 100Mbps. Something to keep in mind if this
    speed may be necessary down the line.

    -Terry
     
    Terry Baranski, Oct 26, 2003
    #6
  7. SysAdmin

    Hugo Drax Guest

    "SysAdmin" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    > Hi All.
    >
    > What exact equipment would I need to place on both ends of a DS3?
    >
    > On side A it would be an Ethernet 10MB handoff routing 2 class C

    blocks
    > over a DS3 to side B.
    >
    > Side B is a few webservers, dialup modem pools, wireless customers,
    > ethernet customers, etc.
    >
    > I want to use Cisco but have little experience with it. Need something
    > reliable and affordable.
    >
    > Also, its important to have 100MB ethernet interfaces on both side
    > because I might bump this to 100MB if necessary.
    >
    > Thank you!!
    >
    >


    You guys are spending the money on DS3's why not include in the budget
    someone who can go and set it up for you? Seem silly to go and rig this
    together with no experience.
     
    Hugo Drax, Oct 26, 2003
    #7
  8. In article <>,
    Terry Baranski <0VE> wrote:
    :Important to note is that, per Cisco, the 3745 is the lowest-end
    :router that can route at 100Mbps. Something to keep in mind if this
    :speed may be necessary down the line.

    The 2621 has dual 10/100 interfaces, so if I understand you correctly,
    you are indicating that the 2621 does not actually have the performance
    needed to sustain 100 Mbps across that interface pair?

    The 2621 is up to 25 Kpps; that would be 100 Mbps if the packets
    averaged 500 bytes or longer (possible for data transfer, but
    interactive work tends to average much shorter packets). Conversely,
    with 64 byte packets, this would be 12.8 Mbps.

    The 2651 is up to 37 Kpps; that would take the average down to 338
    bytes; 64 byte packets would get 18.9 Mbps.

    The 3662 is up to 120 Kpps; that would take the average down to 105
    bytes; 64 byte packets would get 61.4 Mbps, so this would seem to be
    the smallest of the devices able to handle a full DS3 with 64 byte packets.

    The 3745 is up to 225 Kpps; that takes the average down to 56 bytes,
    which is more than the 64 byte minimum packet size, so it does seem to
    be the smallest of the devices that will handle a full 100 Mbps even
    with minimum-sized packets.


    One thing I did not check is whether the DS3 module would require
    an advanced feature set such as PLUS; if it does, then the price of
    the routers could increase noticably.
    --
    Warhol's Second Law of Usenet: "In the future, everyone will troll
    for 15 minutes."
     
    Walter Roberson, Oct 26, 2003
    #8
  9. On 26 Oct 2003 21:36:03 GMT, -cnrc.gc.ca (Walter
    Roberson) wrote:

    >In article <>,
    >Terry Baranski <0VE> wrote:
    >:Important to note is that, per Cisco, the 3745 is the lowest-end
    >:router that can route at 100Mbps. Something to keep in mind if this
    >:speed may be necessary down the line.
    >
    >The 2621 has dual 10/100 interfaces, so if I understand you correctly,
    >you are indicating that the 2621 does not actually have the performance
    >needed to sustain 100 Mbps across that interface pair?


    Right. A 2621 can do over 10Mbps which is why they added 100Mbps
    interfaces to the product line, but it can't do a full 100Mbps. I did
    some testing with a 2621 that was running CEF and no special features
    (like access-lists), and it maxed out at around 40Mbps
    (unidirectional) with full-sized packets before the CPU usage went up
    to 100%.

    >The 2621 is up to 25 Kpps; that would be 100 Mbps if the packets
    >averaged 500 bytes or longer (possible for data transfer, but
    >interactive work tends to average much shorter packets). Conversely,
    >with 64 byte packets, this would be 12.8 Mbps.


    Cisco's pps ratings are measured with 64-byte packets. This tends to
    be the case with other vendors as well, since smaller packet sizes =
    higher pps. Real-world pps is probably less than the Marketing
    numbers even with 64-byte packets. But the 2621 example above
    illustrates that, not surprisingly, there's a dramatic dropoff in pps
    as packet size increases.

    >The 3745 is up to 225 Kpps; that takes the average down to 56 bytes,
    >which is more than the 64 byte minimum packet size, so it does seem to
    >be the smallest of the devices that will handle a full 100 Mbps even
    >with minimum-sized packets.


    This is something I've been wanting to clarify with Cisco. When I was
    told that a 3745 is the lowest-end router than can do 100Mbps, I don't
    know if they looked at the pps rating and ran the numbers with 64-byte
    packets like you did (i.e., they gave me "the official answer"), or if
    the statement applies to full-sized packets as well (from testing that
    they've done in-house, perhaps). Do any of the Cisco people that hang
    out here have any information on this? Given that a 2621's bandwidth
    capability is a few times higher with full-sized packets relative to
    64-byte packets, there may be hope that something cheaper than a 3745
    can indeed reach 100Mbps given a sufficiently large packet size. But
    this also depends on whether or not full-duplex capability is needed;
    if so, the necessary bandwidth effectively doubles to 200Mbps for FE
    or 90Mbps for a DS3.

    -Terry
     
    Terry Baranski, Oct 27, 2003
    #9
  10. SysAdmin

    SysAdmin Guest

    Hi Walter.

    I have plenty of DS1 experience but no DS3 experience, so I'm lost.
    The ISP we use not (used them for many years) is not providing the
    service that we should bet getting. We have only two load-balanced T1s with
    them but the max we see is a sluggish 2000k, as opposed to 3,088k

    One option is to go with Cogent. They sell a 10M connection in their lit
    buildings for $1000.00 (for resellers). The have a 100M connection for
    $3000.00/month. Problem is we are not in any lit bldgs. But, our telco is...
    and they quoted us 2600.00 for a full DS3 from me to where they and Cogent
    both happen to colocate.

    10M for a total of 3600.00/month. Good or bad?

    Thanks for the info so far!!

    "Walter Roberson" <-cnrc.gc.ca> wrote in message
    news:bnh67s$ccn$...
    > In article <>,
    > SysAdmin <> wrote:
    > : What exact equipment would I need to place on both ends of a DS3?
    >
    > Others will need to chime in with the finer nuances, as I have no DS3
    > experience myself.
    >
    > : On side A it would be an Ethernet 10MB handoff routing 2 class C

    blocks
    > :eek:ver a DS3 to side B.
    >
    > : Side B is a few webservers, dialup modem pools, wireless customers,
    > :ethernet customers, etc.
    >
    > : I want to use Cisco but have little experience with it. Need

    something
    > :reliable and affordable.
    >
    > : Also, its important to have 100MB ethernet interfaces on both side
    > :because I might bump this to 100MB if necessary.
    >
    > You can get DS3 modules for the Cisco 2600 and 3600 series, which are
    > relatively low end for Cisco. I notice, though, that all of the DS3
    > options listed for Cisco equipment are listed as being ATM network
    > modules. The 2600/3600 will handle the modules, but the implication
    > is that your line is going to have to be provisioned as ATM, which
    > surely will be fairly expensive.
    >
    > http://www.cisco.com/univercd/cc/td/doc/pcat/atne__p2.htm
    >
    >
    > Are you going to be running voice or video over the line? If you are
    > not planning to do so, then it might be a lot more cost
    > effective to go with a fast packet-switched fibre option that doesn't
    > promise in-hour packet delivery.
    >
    > DS3 is 44.736 Mbps, but you plan to feed it with 10 Mbps, and you made
    > no mention of multimedia. Hmmm. What factors led you to DS3 instead
    > of other technologies?
    >
    > I don't have any current prices for DS3 service, but the last time we
    > had DS3 (about 3 years ago), the price was about $US5000 per month,
    > which is about 4 times the price of a Cisco 2621 router itself (about
    > $US1700). The NM-1A-T3 DS3 adapter will cost you about $US4300, so
    > you are looking at about $US6000 per end for the equipment,
    > giving you a First Year running cost up to about $US72000 (obviously
    > highly dependant on the DS3 costs.)
    >
    > The phrasing of your posting somehow suggests to me that you have
    > LAN experience, but that you might not have much WAN experience,
    > and aren't expecting anything even -close- to the costs I've just noted.
    > When you are working with DS3, the question usually isn't "reliable
    > and affordable" -- the question is usually something more like
    > "QoS and VOIP and dual power supplies and HSRP and redundancy and latency
    > less than so-many milliseconds -- oh, and it would be nice if it doesn't
    > cost 7 arms and 10 legs, but we *need* these features and we'll pay

    whatever
    > it takes."
    >
    > If you just want "a fast link" then there are often alternatives that
    > might cost considerably less. For example, we saved an amazing amount
    > by going gigabit fibre... but we don't have any multimedia traffic
    > worth mentioning.
    > --
    > Suppose there was a test you could take that would report whether
    > you had Free Will or were Pre-Destined. Would you take the test?
     
    SysAdmin, Oct 27, 2003
    #10
  11. SysAdmin

    SysAdmin Guest

    Good point. I need someone so if anyone is available, please let me know.!!
    "Hugo Drax" <> wrote in message
    news:bnhdhd$11bqul$-berlin.de...
    >
    > "SysAdmin" <> wrote in message
    > news:...
    > > Hi All.
    > >
    > > What exact equipment would I need to place on both ends of a DS3?
    > >
    > > On side A it would be an Ethernet 10MB handoff routing 2 class C

    > blocks
    > > over a DS3 to side B.
    > >
    > > Side B is a few webservers, dialup modem pools, wireless customers,
    > > ethernet customers, etc.
    > >
    > > I want to use Cisco but have little experience with it. Need

    something
    > > reliable and affordable.
    > >
    > > Also, its important to have 100MB ethernet interfaces on both side
    > > because I might bump this to 100MB if necessary.
    > >
    > > Thank you!!
    > >
    > >

    >
    > You guys are spending the money on DS3's why not include in the budget
    > someone who can go and set it up for you? Seem silly to go and rig this
    > together with no experience.
    >
    >
     
    SysAdmin, Oct 27, 2003
    #11
  12. SysAdmin

    SysAdmin Guest

    Well I mainly need to just route 10M point to point. I can't afford a ton of
    money right now and would like something small, maybe 1U or 2U at most
    because I'm paying for rack space from what I understand.


    What would be the simplest way to get a DS3 point to point to haul 10M back
    to me? I guess I'd like to be able to climb to the max a DS3 would deliver
    but thats not all that important right now. Reliablity and price is where my
    head is.

    Thanks!!
     
    SysAdmin, Oct 27, 2003
    #12
  13. In article <>,
    SysAdmin <> wrote:
    : The ISP we use not (used them for many years) is not providing the
    :service that we should bet getting. We have only two load-balanced T1s with
    :them but the max we see is a sluggish 2000k, as opposed to 3,088k

    How are you doing the load-balancing? Cisco's load balancing has several
    different possibilities, some of which degenerate to single-line speeds
    under some traffic patterns; your present non-Cisco router might
    perhaps have different load-sharing options that might increase
    throughput under your particular patterns.

    How are you measuring the 2000k ? Is that the rate your present
    (non-Cisco) router is reporting? Is it possible that your present
    routers are underpowered for dual T1? What's their present CPU load?
    This is an internet-connected T1, point-to-ISP rather than office-to-
    office? If so, is the ISP doing you the favour of filtering
    the icmp echo packets generated by Swen? If not, then perhaps your
    performance is being dragged down by the routers dealing with massive
    numbers of icmp echo packets?


    : One option is to go with Cogent. They sell a 10M connection in their lit
    :buildings for $1000.00 (for resellers). The have a 100M connection for
    :$3000.00/month. Problem is we are not in any lit bldgs. But, our telco is...
    :and they quoted us 2600.00 for a full DS3 from me to where they and Cogent
    :both happen to colocate.

    : 10M for a total of 3600.00/month. Good or bad?

    And $US6600 per month to actually use the 100 Mbit??

    I really don't have any idea how far you are from your telco, but
    those prices sound exhorbitant to me if you are in a city.

    How much to get Cogent to light your building? If it's less than
    $US31200 then cheaper to pay them to do so than to pay your telco
    for the DS3 for the first year. And if other business share your
    building, you might be able to convince them to assume a share of
    the install costs; if you are renting space, then the landlord might
    be interested as well, in that having the link enhances the
    value of the property.


    Do you have other options? 100 Mbps fibre? Gig fibre? Frame Relay?
    "Dark fibre"? Or, considering the speeds you have now, would
    xDSL be a possibility? That usually maxes out about 8 Mbps download
    and 2 Mbps upload, but if you are within range of your telco
    and your traffic patterns support it, then it might be good -enough-
    for now, possibly postponing the day you need the expensive
    DS3 by another year.
    --
    Will you ask your master if he wants to join my court at Camelot?!
     
    Walter Roberson, Oct 27, 2003
    #13
  14. In article <>,
    SysAdmin <> wrote:
    >Good point. I need someone so if anyone is available, please let me know.!!


    There are probably many competent consultants available to help you out.
    But while most of us are willing to work almost anywhere, I don't know
    any willing to work noway at nowhere... You'll need to provide usable
    contact information if you want to be contacted, and at least a hint
    about where you're located...

    --
    Vincent C Jones, Consultant Expert advice and a helping hand
    Networking Unlimited, Inc. for those who want to manage and
    Tenafly, NJ Phone: 201 568-7810 control their networking destiny
    http://www.networkingunlimited.com
     
    Vincent C Jones, Oct 27, 2003
    #14
  15. SysAdmin wrote:
    > Well I mainly need to just route 10M point to point. I can't afford a ton of
    > money right now and would like something small, maybe 1U or 2U at most
    > because I'm paying for rack space from what I understand.
    >
    >
    > What would be the simplest way to get a DS3 point to point to haul 10M back
    > to me? I guess I'd like to be able to climb to the max a DS3 would deliver
    > but thats not all that important right now. Reliablity and price is where my
    > head is.
    >
    > Thanks!!
    >
    >


    Two 2600's with IOS+ feature set and NM-1A-T3 DS3 blades. It will not
    route 40Mbps, but it is the cheapest. If you need to go faster than
    10-20Mbps you can swap the 2600's for 36xx or 37xx and reuse the DS3
    blades.

    You should also consider another T1 or two, with better load balancing.
    We've run up to 4 load balanced T1's to a site. You should be able to
    load balanced them using either Cisco's per-packet load balancing or use
    multilink PPP.

    Of course the cheapest may be to move your high bandwidth servers and
    customers to a site that has a fiber handoff from Cogent.

    --Mike
     
    Michael Janke, Oct 28, 2003
    #15
    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. Adrian Jensen

    Suggestions for DS3 router options

    Adrian Jensen, Jul 10, 2003, in forum: Cisco
    Replies:
    3
    Views:
    8,346
    Dave Phelps
    Jul 11, 2003
  2. TeamGracie

    DS3 Bandwidth router question

    TeamGracie, Oct 21, 2003, in forum: Cisco
    Replies:
    2
    Views:
    1,463
    How can I be down
    Mar 2, 2004
  3. bumba
    Replies:
    7
    Views:
    1,301
    hausherrs
    May 2, 2004
  4. Replies:
    2
    Views:
    511
  5. Giuen
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    1,427
    Giuen
    Sep 12, 2008
Loading...

Share This Page