Cisco Switching/Routing :: 1921 - Router Recommendation Based On WAN Throughput
May 21, 2013
I'm trying to identify a Cisco router that will give 300+Mbps through a 1Gb WAN port. I think the 1921 can get up to around 300Mbps with the on board RJ45 ports, but are there any other/better suitable models?
There's no need for any other particular functionality or feature set, the routers aren't doing anything fancy or unusual - it's the achieved throughput that's important.
We want to puchase new Cisco ISR 1921/K9 . i want to know does it support the following sample IP-SLA commands
ip sla 2icmp-echo 172.16.1.2timeout 500frequency 1ip sla schedule 2 life forever start-time now
track 10 rtr 1 reachability delay down 1 up 1 ! track 20 rtr 2 reachability delay down 1 up 1 ip route 0.0.0.0 0.0.0.0 192.168.1.2 track 10ip route 0.0.0.0 0.0.0.0 172.16.1.2 track 20
Im asking above question because we will need to enable ip-sla on the mentioned router. as i read on the cisco webside, it says Cisco-ISR-1921/K9-IP Base support only IP-SLA RESPONDER feature nothing else. If Cisco-921/K9 does not support the above commands , should i go for ordering Cisco-1921-SEC/K9 ?
I have found recently that Cisco 1905 router is having a throughput of only 10 Mb. But the router is having 2 Gig ports!.My understanding is that throughput is the data packetforwarding done by a router at a time.
What is actually mean by throughput of a router. How the router can handle 1 Gb of data from interfaces at a time?
I'm having an issue accessing a clients router on the WAN interface with Cisco config pro. I can get CLI access with SSH without any issue. I have port 22 and 443 allowed as management access from my public IP - SSH working fine but config pro being refused connection, Possibly a certificate issue?
I am facing a problem on a 2811 router. The CPU is remaining around 60% and the router throughput is reaching at most 18 MB while according to the data sheet the 2811 maximum throughput is 61MB. I have checked the output interpreter in order to try and figure out the cause of the high CPU and to determine if it is affecting throughput but there are not processes consuming more than 10%. I have attached the show tech-support and the show process cpu history outputs.
We have a problem with the throughput over etherchannel in LACP with 2 or 4 ports. It is iSCSI traffic (vmware esxi 4.1 U3) is going from 2 separate NICs (ports) to the etherchannel (with 2 or 4 ports) that has a SAN connected (Nexenta).
The SAN is configured in passive LACP and the switch is in active LACP. Actually it does not matter if we do LACP or just MODE ON, still same result: ~1GBit/s throughtput in either direction. Like already mentioned, 2 or 4 ports in the etherchannel make no difference, or the configuration of the etherchannel.
I will post some config data below, but here is the question: Why can't we see traffic beyond 1GBit/s? Source and destination are capable of doing much more than that (vmware esxi RAID 5 of 1TB SATA; SAN 16 x 1TB NL-SAS). If we look with CNA, we can see that the traffic is balanced equally over the etherchannel ports. With or without QOS or flowcontrol, no difference. This whole traffic happenes on this switch.
I have the following config using a Cisco 1921. I am trying to get devices on the the native VLAN to get internet access via the gateway x.x.x.73.Any thing being routed from the other Vlans 15/20/30 can get access, but nothing from an internal IP address. Is there something I am missing.
The Xs replace the same 3 octets for each interface.I am trying to route from VLANs 15/20/30 to see VLAN 5. I have tried a few things, in terms of adding extra ip routes, but can't get anything to work. Each of those Vlans have another router on the other side of them, which I have also tried adding ip routes too, but nothing. One of the routers (Vlan15 is a Draytek 2830). [code]
We've installed cisco devices accross our site in the last year or so and slowing getting on top of it now. How ever our old unmanaged kit seems to be out performing it. It's most like down to my misconfiguration which has lead me to here. Below is the details of hardware and configuration between devices. 3750 Core consisting of the following stacked. [code] I've got MRTG monitoring traffic and the throughput seems to max out 24m/s,
I am currently using catalyst 4506 L3 switch and 2950 L2 switches for pc's which are EOL. I am replacing L3 with 3750X, two switches in a stack. L2 is 2960S all with gbps ports. I have to have a baseline (performance comparison with the current setup and new setup) and I am using the following methods
1. Iperf throughput comparison among local vlans
2. Iperf throughput comparison with remote data centers servers.
3. Ping/ftp upload/download comparison with remote DC's. FTP file is around 3GB.
Today I have tested the above with the new setup and compared it with the old setup. For the tasks 1 & 3 I found better performance with the new setup. However the task 2 did not show any performance increase infact the throughput was much lower comparing to the old setup.
I'll have to replace an old WS-C3550-24. Reasons for this: EOL/EOS & we'll need a NAT capable device...
As I understood, the only L3 catalyst that is able to perform NAT is a 6500? Is that correct? If the above is correct, it seems I can only replace the setup by using a router/ASA with a L2 switch. A router with high throughput (+/- 300Mbps) is hard to find, especially as NAT will require CPU resources...
So, my best (affordable price) solution is getting an ASA5520 (450Mbps FW throughput) and a L2 switch?
I will be installing two Cisco 1921 Routers to connnect a T1 between two offices. We are changing out our current AdTran routers as we would like to bridge three VLAN's across the T1 link. I followed the instructions at (URL) shtml to the best of my ability and my two Gigabit Ethernet ports are tied into a bridged virtual interface (BVI1). I then assigned a IP to BVI1 and another to my Serial0/0/0 then made a route to get to the other side of the T1 and a defualt route out our proxy. What I want to do now is setup QoS to make sure my voice data gets priority.
I setup a QoS ACL called "Voice" with the TCP and UDP source and destination ports that our phone system uses. I then setup a QoS policy on the Serial0/0/0 outgoing interface called "VoiceTraffic" and under the "match" list I match DSCP 46 or my "Voice" access rule. For the action I turned on "Queuing" and set it up for LLQ at 50%. Does this sound about right? Is there anything els eI can setup? I tried ot setup something else on the ethernet side but because they have the BVI I can't. I read some article sin this forum that said I could still apply QoS to the GigabitEthernet ports even if they are in the bridge group but it doens't let me do that.
I am setting up a new 1921 for a public library and I am running into a problem and I bet I am missing something simple. All the internal stuff works and I can ping the outside IP on the 1921 but can't go any further to the internet. The 1921 has the 2 gig ethernet ports, 0/0 is connected to a DSL getting DHCP settings fine from the DSL modem. The other gig ethernet port 0/1 is running the inside network and its function fine, I have a server on it and other clients and they can ping and get dhcp settings etc.I've pasted the config output below and IP addresses of the main actors. [code]
I have already ordered a Cisco ISR 1921/K9. but as i read on Cisco website, it is written that Cisco 1921/K9 only support (IP SLA Responder) feature.
I don't know actually what is sla- responder. but our requirement is we will connect that Router 1921/K9 into 2-ISP links and i want to enable IP- SLA probes on that router so that it can track both the routes into those isp links. so my question is does CISCO 1921/K9 have the support for what i need ?How about Cisco 1921-SEC/K9 ?
We are experiencing output drops on our 3750G-12S (IOS 12.2.55).
I have monitored throughput with MRTG, but it doesn't seem that high compared to that the 3750G is supposed to handle 17.8 Mpps.
The 3750G's are stacked, running ospf, qos, multicast (IPTV) and etherchannel.Is the maximum throughput reduced by stacking or any of the other features?
I don't know if one can estimate what the maximum throughput is per ASIC or per port, but on one of the ASICs that is having drops the peak unicast load is 1.3 Mpps and multicast Mpps is 0.9 Mpps. Total ~2.2 Mpps.
This doesn't seem high at all and I don't understand why the drops are appearing. What I can do to find out the reason for these drops?
I am facing an isssues with 7609 for LAN switching , based on LAN (VRRP/HSRP) feature.Actually we are having ES+ cards (on 7609) and we are using multiple groups(say 350 vrrp groups) running on the router . the routers are connected as router 1>>> mux(which is working as switches)>>> router2
my questing are
1. does their will be "multicast packets" (for VRRP/HSRP group) "from backup router to Master router", when in stable state( ie when Master and backup are already chosen) , or the packet from backup to master should be unicast.I know for sure, the packet from master to back is multicast packets denstination to Multicast IP packet and To MAC address.I am not sure but I think from backup to master it should be multicast
2. what is frequency of these packets( from backup to master)
3. As i have multiper group on a single interface ( we are using q-in-q), when the connectivity from router's is broken, then does all the groups will muticast their active roll in the lan sengment "at once" or it will be in a groups say 100 groups at once, and after few ms few 100's and sone ( as is on OSPF or RIP)
we are in between troubleshooting I hope we get the ans( Actul problem we are seeing in the router's that we have 2 ports on active routers and 2 ports on standby router , but we are not seeing muticast on 1 port on standby router where as all other 3 ports are seeing multicast packets) [code]
I need to set up a L2 llink between my LAN and this 1921 router. I though IRB would do it but its not working yet. Here is the topology- I dont want to see another hop on this 1921 rtr so I hope I can just trunk it or something with IRB. Not working.
Im having some major issues with my new setup. I have a Cisco Router (1921ISR) that is connected to the internet through a t1. In addition to that is another cable modem. Each of these are connected to my firebox through an external interface.My router is on the 10.1.10.X network. My internal network is 192.168.1.X I have several NAT statements on my router pointing to 10.1.10.X addresses. These addresses are defined on my firebox as seconday external addresses and I am SNAT'ing them to 192.168.1.X addresses on my local LAN.This is mostly working well for everything. However, there is an FTP I am connecting to through the a VPN on the cisco that will not connect. The source is a 192.168.1.X address.