WAN Optimization 2 Branches 1 Head Office

[r_naren22]

Hi,

We are looking for a WAN Optimization from cisco, want to optimize the WAN bandwidth where the branch offices use the SQL Server, File server, Web servers, Web Proxy server, e-mail from the head office.

I see we can use WAAS, with the following products.

2800 Series routers with WAAS module at head office and branch offices.

My question is Can we achieve the optimization 3 routers that has WAAS modules.

Do we really need the WAE Appliance at Head office? if yes what is its advantage.?

here is the approximate use specifications.

Head office 200 users

branch office 1 with 100 and other with 50.

What is the maximum capacity of the WAN link that can be optimized using the 2800 series router.

regards

Naren

[mamoss · Accepted solution]

One point you need to be aware of is that the router modules (NM-WAE) only support 1 peer. Therefore you couldn't have a single module at the core site supporting 2 branch offices. Of course you could come up with a design that uses 2 seperate routers/modules, 1 for each link, but that really depends on the network topology. Much better to use WAE-512s or 612s for scalability and growth.

Also note that the NM-WAE-302 only supports a transport license at this time (you don't get the CIFS facilities). The NM-WAE-502 supports the full enterprise license.

So if you want a single WAE at the core, you would need at a minimum:

router/NM-WAE module for each branch.

WAE-512 or larger for core engine.

WAE-512 for core Central Manager.

Plus all the relevant licenses etc.

Your choice of kit also largely depends on the sizing. There's no predefined rule because it depends on your traffic profiles.

[r_naren22]

Hi Mamoss,

First of all, Thanks for the reply.

From your saying.

I guess i have 2 choices(keeping in mind for expandability for VoIP)

1.

Branch offices 2*3825 Router with NM-WAE-502

Head office 1*3845 Router with 2 NM-WAE-502

2.

Branches with 2 3825 Router with NM-WAE-502

Head office 1 WAE-512 Core Engine

Will i get similar Optimization and features with the above choices or will it be different for each choice, please let me know what features gain or miss with the choice.

regards

Naren

[r_naren22]

Also if i go for choice 2, currently the head and branch offices has 1700 series routers,

do i need to replace that 1700 series router at head office???

will it work without any performance loss with choice 2.

regards

Naren

[mamoss]

I'm not sure if choice 1 is feasible (1 router with 2 WAE modules). You might need to do some research with Cisco to establish if it will work because you'd need to apply ACLs to each WCCP session to split the peering. I was suggesting 2 seperate routers but that depends on your network topology. For choice 2 you basically need a router that will support WCCP (or PBR) to redirecte the traffic. A 1700 maybe sufficient, but its relatively old hardware and will have limited lifespan for IOS updates. It would be best to replace for a suitable ISR.

Also don't forget in addition to the WAE-512 engine, you need another WAE-512 for the Central Manager.

[mamoss]

Also to add, I don't believe having multiple NM-WAEs at the core site is the best direction to take. Much better to go the server path for scalability and resilience.

There are 2 good SRNDs released for both the branch and core site scenarios, I would suggest you have a good read of those before making any choices.

[r_naren22]

Thanks mamoss for the guidance.

Will this scenario be OK.

1)Head Office

1*3845 Router

1*WAE-512 for Central Manager(I am expecting that it needs only a minimum hardware requirements)

1*WAE-612 for Core engine( i am expecting the actual performance is from core engine)

2)Branch Office 1

1*3845 Router

1*NM-WAE-502

3)Branch Office 2

1*3845 Router

1*NM-WAE-502

Also in future i can also use the Cisco Call manager express, E1 WIC cards and voicemail Network module on the branch office routers for the IP PBX rite???

with out any performance problem.

at head office i use the 3845 with E1 WIC card as the PSTN gateway and 16 port FXS network module and Cisco MCS Server for Cisco Unified communications manager for IP PBX

regards

Naren

[mamoss]

Naren,

yes that spec looks more realistic. The routers certainly have the capability to expand to include your IPT requirements. I'm sure it will be fine for performance providing you have enough slots for your requirement, but performance is relative to each solution. The WAAS solution won't really impact the CPU performance a lot providing its designed well.