nanog mailing list archives
Re: Broadcom vs Mellanox based platforms
From: Chris Grundemann <cgrundemann () gmail com>
Date: Mon, 4 Jun 2018 12:24:27 -0400
Mellanox commissioned a report along these lines from Tolly in 2016: https://www.mellanox.com/related-docs/tolly/tolly-report-performance-evaluation-2016-march.pdf Obviously a grain of salt is needed with any commissioned study - but it will at least point you to some tests and methodologies that you can use... On Mon, Jun 4, 2018 at 1:41 AM, Kasper Adel <karim.adel () gmail com> wrote:
Hello I’m asked to evaluate switching platforms that has different forwarding chips but the same OS. Assuming these vendors give the same SDK and similar documentation/support, then what would be comparison points to consider, other than the obvious (price, features, bps, pps). I’m thinking, how do i validate their claims about capability to do leaf/spine arch, ToR/Gateways, telemetry, serviceability, facilities to troubleshoot packet drops or FIB programming misses, hidden tools...etc It would be great if anyonw can give some thoughts around it, specially if you have tried one or both. Thanks Kim
-- @ChrisGrundemann http://chrisgrundemann.com
Current thread:
- Broadcom vs Mellanox based platforms Kasper Adel (Jun 03)
- Re: Broadcom vs Mellanox based platforms Chris Grundemann (Jun 04)
- Re: Broadcom vs Mellanox based platforms Tom Hill (Jun 04)
- Re: Broadcom vs Mellanox based platforms Nick Hilliard (Jun 04)
- Re: Broadcom vs Mellanox based platforms ff (Jun 05)
- Re: Broadcom vs Mellanox based platforms Jean Delestre (Jun 05)
- Re: Broadcom vs Mellanox based platforms Sylvain COUTANT (Jun 05)