[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Any experience with Broadcom ICOS out there?
Thank you everyone for the responses so far; I should probably re-phrase
the question at this point ...
Has anyone had production experience with Broadcom ICOS and the features
it claims to support? Positive or negative?
On 1/5/18 2:46 PM, joel jaeggli wrote:
> On 1/5/18 10:50 AM, Bryan Holloway wrote:
>> Fiberstore is rolling out some CRAZY cheap 100Gbps switches, and I'm
>> curious if anyone in the community has any thoughts or real-life world
>> experience with them.
>> E.g.: https://www.fs.com/products/69340.html
>> For the price point, it's almost in the "too good to be true" category.
> The COGS on a single ASIC tomahawk switch was is in $5000-7000 range. so
> it's consistent with a low value add reseller of merchant silicon. that
> silicon is getting older (tomahawk 3 was announced in anticipation of
> 2018) so we can presume they are getting cheaper. I generally have a
> favorable experience of FS but then I buy optics and cables, not
> switches so your mileage may vary.
>> Naturally it claims to support an impressive range of features
>> including BGP, IS-IS, OSPF, MPLS, VRFs, blah blah blah.
> The software stack is Broadcom ICOS. if you're not familiar with that I
> start looking at that. if it meets you needs that's cool. if not you
> might be looking at cumulus or onos. That said Broadcom does enough to
> get their customers (whitebox odms) out the door, not necessarily the
> customers of those odms so your recourse to a developer is kind of
> limited which you get a from a vendor more involved in the software
> stack. A lot of those choices here depend on how responsible you want to
> be for what's running inside the box.
>> There was an earlier discussion about packet buffer issues, but,
>> assuming for a second that it's not an issue,
> It can be avoided, but for people used to running all 10Gb/s cut-through
> trident 2s kind of hot, some of consequences are kind of impressive. 4
> much smaller buffers and the virtual assurance that you'll be doing rate
> conversion eats into the forwarding budget.
>> can anyone say they've used these and/or the L2/L3 features that they
>> purportedly support?
>> Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â - bryan