I stand corrected... I have double checked, and I remembered it all wrong (assumed it's like with the 6748...). Only 1x8G.
BTW, if you want to use an etherchannel with one port on a 65XX and another on a 61XX (or another combination of qos-wise incompatible cards) you need to use the following command "no mls qos channel-consistency" Arie -----Original Message----- From: Sachin Gupta (sagupta) Sent: Sunday, June 14, 2009 07:00 To: Arie Vayner (avayner); '[email protected]'; '[email protected]' Cc: '[email protected]' Subject: Re: [c-nsp] x6148 vs. x6548 The 6548 has a single 8G fabric connection. Sachin ----- Original Message ----- From: [email protected] <[email protected]> To: Geoffrey Pendery <[email protected]>; Bill Blackford <[email protected]> Cc: [email protected] <[email protected]> Sent: Sat Jun 13 20:48:17 2009 Subject: Re: [c-nsp] x6148 vs. x6548 Geoffrey, A small correction. The x6548 is an 8G card, but it has 2 fabric connections, so the limit would be 16G. As long as you do not use the other 7 ports out of each 8 port group, each port group can give you 1G, but take into consideration that the x6148 is a classic card, so it has no fabric connections, and uses the shared bus. In general the x6148 is not supposed to be a "core" card. It's for connecting low end desktops etc. Arie -----Original Message----- From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Geoffrey Pendery Sent: Friday, June 12, 2009 16:36 To: Bill Blackford Cc: [email protected] Subject: Re: [c-nsp] x6148 vs. x6548 Well, with the 6548, you're still going to be limited to 8 Gbps, rather than 6 Gbps. It's a CEF256 card, which means it has an 8 Gbps fabric connection to the supervisor, instead of just sharing the 32 Gbps like the 6148 does. So if you're looking to drive more than a gig through an Etherchannel, it will do it, but only for a limited number of them. The 6748 would bump your bottleneck up to 40 Gbps. I have a question of my own, since this subject has come up a time or two - regarding the 6148's, the statement is made a couple times that Etherchannel will get you port redundancy but no extra bandwidth, since the ASIC is only a gig. But if I distribute my channel across two slots, say Gig 1/1 and Gig 2/1, does that get me around the gig limit? Or even Gig 1/1 and Gig 1/48, since it's separate ASICs? Logic tells me yes, but I've heard the "1 gig limit" mentioned as if it's a hard platform limitation, not just a result of a particular bottleneck. My instinctive behavior with channels is to span them across blades anyway, to guard against blade failure.... -Geoff On Thu, Jun 11, 2009 at 9:20 PM, Bill Blackford<[email protected]> wrote: > I've recently learned that the ws-x6148-ge-tx has 6 gig ASICs, one for every > 8 ports thusly rendering this line card to a 8:1 oversubscription ratio. I've > also learned that an etherchannel is limited to 1 gig, great for redundancy, > but slow as all get up. > > I'm buying a ws-x6548-ge-tx in hope that it can do much better (I didn't have > enough in my budget for a x6748). How does the 6548 compare to the 6148? I > have a pair of shiny new sup720-3bxl's. > > Thank you for any insight from the field as Cisco's site seems best suited > for the marketing of products. > > -b > > -- > Bill Blackford > Senior Network Engineer > Technology Systems Group > Northwest Regional ESD > > my /home away from home > > _______________________________________________ > cisco-nsp mailing list [email protected] > https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nsp > archive at http://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-nsp/ > _______________________________________________ cisco-nsp mailing list [email protected] https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nsp archive at http://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-nsp/ _______________________________________________ cisco-nsp mailing list [email protected] https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nsp archive at http://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-nsp/ _______________________________________________ cisco-nsp mailing list [email protected] https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nsp archive at http://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-nsp/
