max throughput in cisco routers

[ocram12345]

Hi, I still have to understand what Cisco means with the terms max throughput and wire-speed.

Example: I have a 1841 and soon I'll have to set it up for 200m multicast traffic.

How do I know if the 1841 will be able to support that traffic?

Is there a way to know if a certain model will be able to sustain a given data rate before dropping packets?

Thanks

Ocram

[lgijssel]

This is probably the info you are looking for:

http://www.cisco.com/web/AP/partners/ANZ_PE/borderless_network/Cisco_routerperformance.pdfhttp://www.cisco.com/web/AP/partners/ANZ_PE/borderless_network/Cisco_routerperformance.pdf

CCO login is required to view the information.

regards,

Leo

[ocram12345]

So is it that simple? if I take a look at that table the first router that can handle such traffic is the 2921, are there other factors I should take into account?

[lgijssel]

Numbers are given with 64 byte packet size, IP only, and are only an indication of raw switching performance.

These are testing numbers, usually with FE to FE, GigE to GigE or POS to POS, no services enabled. As you add ACL's,

encryption, compression, etc - performance will decline significantly Numbers are given with 64 byte packet size, IP only, and are only an indication of raw switching performance.
These are testing numbers, usually with FE to FE, GigE to GigE or POS to POS, no services enabled. As you add ACL's,
encryption, compression, etc - performance will decline significantly....

Using 64-bit packets is a worst case scenario because a maximum number of ip headers must be processed.

However, figures are without any services enabled. You should also consider an increase in load over the device life span. Taking all of this into consideration, I would always go for a platform which performs at least one step better than your minimum requirements, just to be on the safe side.

regards,

Leo

[Joseph W. Doherty]

Disclaimer

The   Author of this posting offers the information contained within this   posting without consideration and with the reader's understanding that   there's no implied or expressed suitability or fitness for any purpose.   Information provided is for informational purposes only and should not   be construed as rendering professional advice of any kind. Usage of  this  posting's information is solely at reader's own risk.

Liability Disclaimer

In   no event shall Author be liable for any damages whatsoever (including,   without limitation, damages for loss of use, data or profit) arising  out  of the use or inability to use the posting's information even if  Author  has been advised of the possibility of such damage.

Posting

To add to Leo's post, also you need to keep in mind for unicast performance, you need to take into account there's usually traffic in both directions.  I.e., you should generally half the performance values listed in the tables he provided.

Also you need to keep in mind, you generally don't want your router running flat out; often you don't want to go above 70% for sustained load.  I.e. you'll want to reduce listed performance for that too.

Lastly, you note this is for multicast.  Since packets could be replicated on multiple interfaces, I'm sure there's additional load for that, although cannot provide you any estimate for the additional loading.

PS:

Wire-speed (or line-rate) denote the link is running at 100% is maximum capacity.  For example, for Ethernet 64 byte sized packets, that would be 14,880 packets per second.  (FastEthernet and Gig Ethernet multiply by 10 and 100, respectively.)