Cisco's HFR Gets Mod

COMMENTS

Newest First | Oldest First | Threaded View

<< < Page 5 / 6 > >>

Tony Li 12/5/2012 | 1:47:09 AM

re: Cisco's HFR Gets Mod So, what are these guys going to do with such a platform?

Buy a platform that has room for expansion and a lifetime in their network that exceeds the depreciation cycle of the gear.

Tony

Reply | Post Message | MESSAGES LIST | START A BOARD

Tony Li 12/5/2012 | 1:47:09 AM

re: Cisco's HFR Gets Mod Of course neither the T640 nor the 8812 meet Telcordia requirements when you put two of them in a single rack, so these numbers are just academic... :)

Which of the NEBS requirements are you referring to? I would hazard the guess that you're not talking about the ones on power density, the requirement for a 12" depth and no fans. AFAIK, both the T640 and 8812 fully comply with the real requirements.

Tony

Reply | Post Message | MESSAGES LIST | START A BOARD

coreghost 12/5/2012 | 1:47:09 AM

re: Cisco's HFR Gets Mod Expect Cisco to announce oc-768 and interconnect support with the HFR, but they could literally be a year or more before they actually ship.

Even if does actually ship, there is usually no
way to trust that it is what cisco says it is.
They are very capable of putting an OC-768 front
end on an OC-192. And any initial customer
would probably be forced to sign agreements
promising not to describe the fantastic techincal
"innovations" cisco delivered in the product.

Reply | Post Message | MESSAGES LIST | START A BOARD

Tony Li 12/5/2012 | 1:47:08 AM

re: Cisco's HFR Gets Mod 2 T640's in a 7'' rack doesn't mean you can manage 64 OC-192s as a single element. You need the TX for that and that takes up its own rack.

Quite true. However, unless you mess up your interconnect badly, it takes far less volume than the edge chassis. Ergo, the volume of the edge chassis dominates the density of the distributed system.

Tony

Reply | Post Message | MESSAGES LIST | START A BOARD

pig3head 12/5/2012 | 1:47:05 AM

re: Cisco's HFR Gets Mod (1), software?
(2), hardware?
(3), blurry market demand?
(4), ???

Reply | Post Message | MESSAGES LIST | START A BOARD

null0 12/5/2012 | 1:47:05 AM

re: Cisco's HFR Gets Mod Tony

u de man.....;)

Null

Reply | Post Message | MESSAGES LIST | START A BOARD

priam 12/5/2012 | 1:47:04 AM

re: Cisco's HFR Gets Mod Hm. In that it pushes you toward what coreghost rightly identifies as the difficulties of distributed programming?

----------->
IMHO, the software is actually a tad harder than the hardware, which is decidedly non-trivial.

The market demand is quite clear.

Reply | Post Message | MESSAGES LIST | START A BOARD

Tony Li 12/5/2012 | 1:47:04 AM

re: Cisco's HFR Gets Mod IMHO, the software is actually a tad harder than the hardware, which is decidedly non-trivial.

The market demand is quite clear.

Tony

Reply | Post Message | MESSAGES LIST | START A BOARD

indianajones 12/5/2012 | 1:47:00 AM

re: Cisco's HFR Gets Mod Well, that was not the point.

One could not claim that 2 T640s in a 7'' rack supports 64 OC-192s. An operator cannot place the 2 T640s and the TX in a single 7'' rack. End of discussion. The TX needs a separate chassis.

On a related note, can anyone guarantee that the systems are completely non-blocking with an interconnect like the TX? I think by the time carriers need to terminate more than 30 or so OC-192s worth of traffic at a single POP, they better come up with a better and cheaper POP architecture and use cheaper optical switches (which may be able to do the trick in 2-4 years timeframe)

Reply | Post Message | MESSAGES LIST | START A BOARD

Tony Li 12/5/2012 | 1:46:59 AM

re: Cisco's HFR Gets Mod
Ok, so what is your point?

If you're trying to perform an apples to apples comparison that matters, then let's think about what can be fit into 3 full racks. I suspect that HFR will get two chassis of interfaces and a full rack of interconnect, giving it 128 OC-192s.

Juniper would get 5 T640's plus the TX, for 160.

Procket would get 5 8812 plus <magic goes="" here="">, for 240.

Bottom line: what starts out as a small density advantage will pay handsomely when you look at interesting multipliers. Yes, at the small scale, all architectures will have a nasty discontinuity right at the point where they hit the next quantum of bandwidth, but in the long run, this is less of a factor than overall density.

Tony
</magic>

Reply | Post Message | MESSAGES LIST | START A BOARD

<< < Page 5 / 6 > >>