RE: Anyone Deployed Ascend's GRF IP Switch?

[Chris MacFarlane <cjm () ican net>]

Well they are out as we (ACC) have deployed them and the have worked well so far.  We have had a couple of bug to date 
and Ascend has addressed them quickly.  As for them being new they have been around for two years but I do agree that 
they need some polishing on the router management side.

Rgds

cjm

-----Original Message-----
From:   Brian Horvitz [SMTP:horvitz () mediaone net]
Sent:   Saturday, August 23, 1997 1:06 AM
To:     Lane Patterson; Christofer Hoff
Cc:     nanog () merit edu
Subject:        Re: Anyone Deployed Ascend's GRF IP Switch?

 Why, you know where to get one?  And even if they were out, I'm not sure
I'm want to deploy anything in a 60 node network pushing that much data
which was so new.

Brian


> Talk to Nathan Stratton at Netrail.  He's our collective test case :-)
>
> Aren't you looking at Cisco's BFR too?
>
> -Lane
>
> On Fri, 22 Aug 1997, Christofer Hoff wrote:
>
> > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> > Hash: SHA1
> >
> > We are in the development phase of engineering the deployment of
> > approximately
> > 60 POPs throughout the US.  Our 'standard' configuration is normally
> > based upon
> > cisco equipment and more often than not consists of a 7513 connected
> > to a Catalyst
> > 5000/5500 via FDDI with the various internal LAN segments switched
> > from there via FD 100BaseTX.
> >
> > We've begun to explore the viability of deploying the GRF for several
> > reasons,
> > not the least of which is cost and performance.  Given (and taken
> > with a grain
> > of salt) the apparent performance differential between the cisco 7513
> > and the
> > Ascend GRF (the GRF outperforms the 7513 substantially in our tests,)
> > my
> > concerns are more operations-related.
> >
> > The GRF DOES support the 'full' implementation (including extensions)
> > of
> > BGP4 and the other 'vanilla' TCP services that you'd come to expect
> > from
> > a router (er, layer 3 switch?) of this caliber.  Since it's NOT a
> > cisco,
> > we'd have to deviate and not utilize EIGRP as our IGP of choice, and
> > deploy
> > OSPF which poses its own set of issues.
> >
> > SO, the bottom line...has anyone else deployed multiple GRF400's with
> > success.
> > Ascend will tell you that UUNET has deployed (or is going to) a
> > hundred or so.
> > I want to talk to people USING the technology, not thinking about it.
> >
> > Your comments and opinions are welcomed.
> >
> > TIA,
> >
> > Christofer Hoff
> >
> > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
> > Version: PGP for Personal Privacy 5.0
> > Charset: noconv
> >
> > iQA/AwUBM/3KcnRoVZYHVpX1EQKKwgCgsnu30mTvCXZRyH68TOWeq3z0uZkAnj0F
> > Kmgl0te7Wq6AzsQ1/0GjMV5N
> > =d5NC
> > -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
> >
> >             ,,,
> >            (o-o)
> > ------.oOO--(_)--OOo.---------------------------------
> > Christofer L. Hoff            \  No true genius is
> > Chief Nerd,                    \  possible without a
> > NodeWarrior Networks, Inc       \  little intelligent
> >                                  \  madness!
> > hoff () nodewarrior net              \
> > http://www.nodewarrior.net         \ -Peter Uberoth
> > "Nuthin' but Net!"                  \
> > ------------------------------------------------------
> >        310.568.1700 vox - 310.568.4766 fax