×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Cisco Introduces a 322 Tbit/sec. Router

kdawson posted more than 4 years ago | from the one-loc-per-second dept.

The Internet 281

CWmike writes "Today Cisco Systems introduced its next-generation Internet core router, the CRS-3, with about three times the capacity of its current platform. 'The Internet will scale faster than any of us anticipate,' Cisco's John Chambers said while announcing the product. At full scale, the CRS-3 has a capacity of 322Tbit/sec., roughly three times that of the CRS-1, introduced in 2004. It also has more than 12 times the capacity of its nearest competitor, Chambers said. The CRS-3 will help the Internet evolve from a messaging to an entertainment and media platform, with video emerging as the 'killer app,' Chambers said. Using a CRS-3, every person in China, which has a population just over 1.3 billion, could participate in a video phone call at the same time. (Or you could pump nearly one Library of Congress per second through the device, or give everyone in San Fransisco a 1Gbps internet connection.) AT&T said it has been using the CRS-3 to test 100Gbit/sec. data links in tests on a commercial fiber route in Florida and Louisiana."

cancel ×
This is a preview of your comment

No Comment Title Entered

Anonymous Coward 1 minute ago

No Comment Entered

281 comments

Will it run DDWRT or Tomato? (4, Funny)

NevarMore (248971) | more than 4 years ago | (#31417942)

Kidding, but you know someone is going to seriously ask that sometime today.

Re:Will it run DDWRT or Tomato? (2, Insightful)

natehoy (1608657) | more than 4 years ago | (#31417974)

I'm sure BrainSlayer will at least ask you to register for the pay version of DD-WRT. :)

Re:Will it run DDWRT or Tomato? (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31418688)

Yep, because idiots think their linux nat appliances are routers just because they use them in an 'office', and those of us who've worked in telecom laugh at them decisively.

Term office used in quotes because an office of under a 100 people is a joke, and you are a wannabe sysadmin.

Library of Congresses per second (4, Funny)

ravenspear (756059) | more than 4 years ago | (#31417948)

The new standard in router benchmarks for the 21st century!

"Library of Congresses"? (4, Interesting)

XanC (644172) | more than 4 years ago | (#31417964)

Perhaps "Libraries of Congress"?

Re:"Library of Congresses"? (4, Funny)

wsanders (114993) | more than 4 years ago | (#31418024)

It will cost you an entire Mint of Denver full of money to get the 322Tbit version, and you would have to plug in approximately 3 Hoover Dams of fiber optic connections, each operating at the speed of the Bureau of Printing and Engraving, just to get the full effect. Otherwise, it's just about 4.5 US Post Offices worth of throughput/

Of course, some people might be able to use that.

Re:"Library of Congresses"? (4, Funny)

srussia (884021) | more than 4 years ago | (#31418324)

Otherwise, it's just about 4.5 US Post Offices worth of throughput/

Of course, some people might be able to use that.

Not even Facebook can work with 1.0 USPS latency, I'm afraid.

Re:"Library of Congresses"? (1)

elfprince13 (1521333) | more than 4 years ago | (#31418360)

Stop confusing latency with throughput.

Re:"Library of Congresses"? (4, Funny)

srussia (884021) | more than 4 years ago | (#31418678)

Stop confusing latency with throughput.

Great line! I think I'll use it in my next movie:

Elfprincess 13: "Is that it?"

Mailman: "Stop confusing latency with throughput"

Re:"Library of Congresses"? (0, Redundant)

davester666 (731373) | more than 4 years ago | (#31418406)

It's cheaper and more profitable for the major ISP's to just use data caps to limit the amount of data you can use instead of paying to keep expanding the capacity of their network.

Re:"Library of Congresses"? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31418334)

These crazy americans and their imperial units, can I have that in Metric instead?

Re:"Library of Congresses"? (1)

kenp2002 (545495) | more than 4 years ago | (#31418342)

I am still a fan of "Oreos per hours" for car speeds or better yet "Furlongs per Pint" for fuel efficency...

Re:"Library of Congresses"? (1)

samkass (174571) | more than 4 years ago | (#31418076)

Perhaps "Libraries of Congress"?

I'm not sure, since there is only one Library of Congress and you're talking about duplicates of them, not creating different entities.

In any case, I thought MP3 songs were the new benchmark for capacity.

Re:"Library of Congresses"? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31418266)

Perhaps "Libraries of Congress"?

I'm not sure, since there is only one Library of Congress and you're talking about duplicates of them, not creating different entities.

In any case, I thought MP3 songs were the new benchmark for capacity.

WHOOSH

Re:"Library of Congresses"? (2, Informative)

v1 (525388) | more than 4 years ago | (#31418338)

In any case, I thought MP3 songs were the new benchmark for capacity.

Naw, that was sooo 2000. And by 2004 we'd already abandoned that and gone to DVD rips. We're currently at bluray 720p rips, with 1020p knocking loudly.

Re:"Library of Congresses"? (1)

nsstrunks (1763352) | more than 4 years ago | (#31418680)

I thought it was 1080p? Either way, I'm sure we'll abandon that soon enough... for whatever the media thinks is the next hot thing... dual layer Blu-ray rips!

Is it a constant? (4, Funny)

Xocet_00 (635069) | more than 4 years ago | (#31418148)

In all seriousness, isn't the library of congress always growing? Is its growth rate significant enough that it's a very different size than it was in, say, the 1980s when we heard about hard disks that may someday be able to store an entire library of congress?

Re:"Library of Congresses"? (4, Insightful)

C_Kode (102755) | more than 4 years ago | (#31418608)

Library of Congress is a moving target. What would pass today, won't in 2020.

That said, I'm going with Video Calls per Chinese Person too. It's just much funnier. :)

Re:"Library of Congresses"? (1)

anexkahn (935249) | more than 4 years ago | (#31418620)

I always measure my bandwidth in Libraries of Congress per second LBOCps Example: At home I have a 2.9617214795225155279503105590062e-8 LBOCps connection at home :) This is assuming the library of congress has 322 Tbits of information in it.

Re:Library of Congresses per second (1)

jo42 (227475) | more than 4 years ago | (#31418288)

One "Library of Congresses per second" is about one extensive pr0n collection per hour. Hmmm... Not bad...

Awesome router (4, Funny)

Harik (4023) | more than 4 years ago | (#31417952)

If the first poster doesn't have a comment like "Yeah I'm using one of them right now, my internet is blazingly fast", it's a wasted opportunity.

Re:Awesome router (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31418016)

It's so fast that you won't notice the lag of deep packet inspection sending everything you do to the NSA or to censoring [eff.org] politically subversive blogs.

The question on everyone's mind (4, Informative)

Jeremy Erwin (2054) | more than 4 years ago | (#31417990)

MSRP starts at $90,000. source [cisco.com]

Re:The question on everyone's mind (1)

Hadlock (143607) | more than 4 years ago | (#31418054)

Great! I'd been eyeing the CRS-1 for a while, but now that the CRS-3 is out, the price on the CRS-1 will finally drop down enough that I can complete my beowulf cluster of failed linux PDAs. Looks like CRS-1s are going for $20,000 on ebay used.

Re:The question on everyone's mind (4, Interesting)

mcrbids (148650) | more than 4 years ago | (#31418178)

Strangely, at $90,000 a pop, this strikes me as rather cheap. I wonder if that's a "rate limited" model so that you have to pay big bux more in order to get the full capacity?

Re:The question on everyone's mind (4, Insightful)

Wesley Felter (138342) | more than 4 years ago | (#31418216)

Strangely, at $90,000 a pop, this strikes me as rather cheap. I wonder if that's a "rate limited" model so that you have to pay big bux more in order to get the full capacity?

You wish. For $90K you probably get an empty chassis... the smallest available empty chassis, that is.

Re:The question on everyone's mind (1)

amn108 (1231606) | more than 4 years ago | (#31418720)

In the kind of world we live in (which "we make ourselves") it wouldn't surprise me if one had to pay per unit of bandwidth transferred by the router. :|

Wow! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31418232)

This is getting pretty close to gaming router territory.

Me thinks a linksys re-branding could be in the CRS-3's future.

Re:The question on everyone's mind (4, Insightful)

Sponge Bath (413667) | more than 4 years ago | (#31418234)

I take it that $90K is for an empty shell and you must buy plug-in modules to actually accomplish anything.

Re:The question on everyone's mind (1)

DarkOx (621550) | more than 4 years ago | (#31418390)

Yea and I can only imagine the SMARTNET costs...You think TAC will call you back in less than two hours if you own one of these things.

Re:The question on everyone's mind (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31418602)

I think that you wouldn't be on a SMARTNET contract if you bought one of these things. In fact, if you are even near the market segment for one of these you're probably are getting a lot better support than the guy who buys a few IP Phones and a CallManager.

Re:The question on everyone's mind (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31418308)

That's absolutely outrageous! I'll just stick with my WRT54G, thank you very much, and I recommend others do the same!

One word of warning to my fellow backbone operators, though; before you bid on a cheap WRT54G you find on eBay, make sure it's not one of the newer versions with reduced flash capacity.

Re:The question on everyone's mind (1, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31418402)

You must work for Comcast.

Re:The question on everyone's mind (1)

bored_lurker (788136) | more than 4 years ago | (#31418716)

I bet that is the cost of the shelf. I work in the industry and I can tell you we often use the Bic razor model of "giving away" the shelf / backplane and making margin on the cards.

Can you imagine (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31418056)

networking a Beowulf cluster with these?

322 Tbits/sec (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31418058)

ought to be enough for everyone.

Fast, fast, fast! (3, Funny)

Archaemic (1546639) | more than 4 years ago | (#31418080)

I'd make a joke about how the internet can now handle the flow of porn through it, but I'm sure that with one of these routers, I've already been beaten to the punch!

jaded, who care? (4, Insightful)

Neil Watson (60859) | more than 4 years ago | (#31418094)

Between terrible last mile infrastructure and ISP throttling I can't help but sarcastically comment big freaking deal.

Re:jaded, who care? You're so old-school! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31418274)

These things will likely put at risk ISP's who chose to continue throttling, as their competitors could install one or two and they would likely be out of business within a year given the capacity to add featured content for well targeted markets.

What the Linux community need to do is begin thinking about how they can invest in a few themselves and then offer nearly "free" distribution of content by the larger creative community. This would put tremendous pressure on cable operators everywhere by giving the public an alternative mechanism for receiving their programming, internet, phone, etc.

Installation of say about 10,000 - 20,0000 of these could permit phone services to project holograms of the person you are talking to over the phone, not just video. The bad news, is of course, the number of phone-sex providers and their commercials who jump dramatically.

Re:jaded, who care? (3, Insightful)

kenp2002 (545495) | more than 4 years ago | (#31418306)

Between terrible last mile infrastructure and ISP throttling I can't help but sarcastically comment big freaking deal.

We'll they can't complain now that there isn't enough bandwidth so they have to meter it now.

Cisco as I see it has a vested interested in ensuring that the net remains neutral to push these kind of product upgrades. Coupled with premise end-point equipment it stands that they would want more bandwidth use and leverage monitoring, rather then metering, Internet use.

Metering is a waste, monitoring and then selling said info, there is where the money will be...

Re:jaded, who care? (1)

Monkeedude1212 (1560403) | more than 4 years ago | (#31418428)

I suppose if your ISP got one of these you might find an improvement - especially if Google opens shop next door and wants to offer you a Gigabit connection to your house, your ISP might jump up to stay in competition.

And, just in case you weren't aware, there are cases where networking exists outside of the internet. True story!

Woohoo! Yay! Wonderful! (1)

Colin Smith (2679) | more than 4 years ago | (#31418118)

I can watch TV... On the Internet!

John Chambers: Man of Vision!

 

Re:Woohoo! Yay! Wonderful! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31418468)

Is he the brother of Marilyn?

322 tb/s Without or Without... (2, Interesting)

hackus (159037) | more than 4 years ago | (#31418124)

CIA/NSA software loaded to do deep packet inspection?

-Hack

Re:322 tb/s Without or Without... (1)

gknoy (899301) | more than 4 years ago | (#31418494)

Wouldn't a more efficient way to do that be to just route ALL the traffic to a separate machine (or set of machines) to do the deep packet inspection?

Re:322 tb/s Without or Without... (1)

Saint Mitchell (144618) | more than 4 years ago | (#31418800)

Yes. That's essentially what they did with AT&T when they were doing some big-time packet snooping. They spliced the fiber and ran it to it's own floor where it was analyzed by a separate system.

"...video emerging as the 'killer app'" (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31418144)

I suggest we call it.... hmmm, commercial broadcast television, with the emphasis on "Commercial(s)", or maybe Cablevision!

With MOAR, well, everything!

322 Tbit/sec until....... (0)

MilesTails (1413987) | more than 4 years ago | (#31418188)

Until you put anything processor intensive on. You'd probably get no where near that.

Re:322 Tbit/sec until....... (1, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31418424)

If it's anything like the CRS-1 (and apparently it is), then it won't matter what you turn on, you'll still be able to pass line rate traffic. After reading all the marketing, I think the real number people should be focusing on is 4.48Tbps for one chassis. You can't get up to 322 Tbps unless you go to a larger configuration (more than one chassis). However, I think 224 10GE should be a good starting point for this configuration, and still puts other routers to shame.

Geek Porn (3, Insightful)

keithpreston (865880) | more than 4 years ago | (#31418222)

Ok, 322Tbit/sec is cool and all, but where is the geek porn of it? Images, technical details and specifications? Otherwise it is vaporware to me.

Re:Geek Porn (4, Funny)

NevarMore (248971) | more than 4 years ago | (#31418322)

You meantion *322Tbit/sec* and *porn* in the same sentence and you still want to see pictures of the *router*?

CONNECT THE DOTS MAN!

Re:Geek Porn (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31418502)

There isn't much on the tubes about this yet. It's only been announced. So far, I can only find some imitation porn for you,

http://www.smartplc.com/images/crs3.jpg
http://himawan.blogsome.com/images/crs3.JPG

Re:Geek Porn (4, Informative)

colourmyeyes (1028804) | more than 4 years ago | (#31418520)

Cables? (3, Interesting)

kyrre (197103) | more than 4 years ago | (#31418230)

What kind of wire would this router need? Is a single fibre cable enough for this kind of bandwidth? What is the limit of a fibre cable?

Re:Cables? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31418478)

RS-232 null modem cable. To prevent any data loss the CRS-3 is outfitted with a 16550 UART.

When do we consumers benefit? (4, Insightful)

bughunter (10093) | more than 4 years ago | (#31418270)

So, I've been waiting for something better than 150 kB/s service for years, despite the promises by AT&T and Verizon that they're "rolling out" fiber to the home. Not my home.

When can I finally stream in real time at least one channel of video content that's not so compressed that it's unwatchable? At a subscription rate of under $40/month? When that happens, I'll be impressed.

However, I'm fearing that USians have been living under monopoly conditions of artificial bandwidth scarcity for so long that we're going to let the AT&Ts and Verizons charge us an arm and a leg for this kind of service in the near term.

Re:When do we consumers benefit? (4, Interesting)

olden (772043) | more than 4 years ago | (#31418638)

Amen to that.
I live in Palo Alto, heart of the Silicon Valley I was told. Fastest connection I can get (without having to take a 2nd mortgage, that is): 768 kbit/s. And, with a static IP, the same price as 9 years ago. WTF?!?
In the meantime, French ISPs are addressing complaints that 22 Mbit/s VDSL is a bit old-school by offering 100 Mbit/s FTTH [www.free.fr] (phone and TV included, of course), Japanese get Gigabit for ~60$/mo [auone-net.jp]...
AT&T, I'm glad you're upgrading your equipment at long last... Now when can I get better than 3rd-world connection?

Re:When do we consumers benefit? (1)

b0bby (201198) | more than 4 years ago | (#31418642)

Hmm, I got FIOS this year, it's about $40/month for the internet portion, and I can stream HD Netflix movies which look great with no problem. So I'd say find out where Google is rolling out their fast fiber & move there ;)

Re:When do we consumers benefit? (0)

2obvious4u (871996) | more than 4 years ago | (#31418692)

Start your own fiber bandwidth company. The most expensive cost will probably be the right of way to run the cables.

Too small a jump for a 6 years -- red flags! (2, Interesting)

wonkavader (605434) | more than 4 years ago | (#31418372)

"At full scale, the CRS-3 has a capacity of 322Tbit/sec., roughly three times that of the CRS-1, which was introduced in 2004."

That was six years ago and we're only tripling the speed? Is it cheaper? Smaller?

Moore's law (which doesn't work in every way, but it certainly works for the computing processors in this thing) would suggest that this thing has a lot more CPU power than the CRS-1. (In six years we'd expect somewhere between 8 and 32 times the oomph.) And yet they only encumbered it with three times the bandwidth.

I'm worried that a lot more processor power is going into filtering. Cisco is one of the big anti-network neutrality advocates. They want to sell the machines to impose the rules.

If this machine isn't lower power or smaller or cheaper or just built incompetently, then the real story here isn't it's bandwidth -- it's its power for adjusting traffic for increased profits.

Re:Too small a jump for a 6 years -- red flags! (4, Insightful)

ishobo (160209) | more than 4 years ago | (#31418524)

Moore's law is about transistor density, not computing power.

Re:Too small a jump for a 6 years -- red flags! (2, Insightful)

warmflatsprite (1255236) | more than 4 years ago | (#31418728)

Moore's law (which doesn't work in every way, but it certainly works for the computing processors in this thing) would suggest that this thing has a lot more CPU power than the CRS-1. (In six years we'd expect somewhere between 8 and 32 times the oomph.) And yet they only encumbered it with three times the bandwidth.

Moore's law [wikipedia.org] applies to the number of transistors on an integrated circuit and has absolutely nothing to do with bandwidth. Chip throughput is much more a function of the chip architecture than the number of transistors on chip. Even if chip throughput was somehow correlated to Moore's law, there are still unrelated inefficiencies in the physical layer that are very complex and difficult to overcome.

Red Flags? (1)

flahwho (1243110) | more than 4 years ago | (#31418730)

And though its called a law, It's NOT & increased processing power does not equate to throughput. GEEZ!

What was the question again? (1)

fast turtle (1118037) | more than 4 years ago | (#31418392)

I'm sorry but my CRS-3 (can't remember shit) Syndrome is running quite fast today. It's currently deleting the question before you even ask it and creating a space/time continium loop meaning we'll have to repeat this day forever

Surveillance! (1)

gknoy (899301) | more than 4 years ago | (#31418442)

Imagine how much traffic could be routed to collection clusters on behalf of your favourite three letter agency.

It runs QNX (4, Interesting)

Animats (122034) | more than 4 years ago | (#31418484)

Like all Cisco high-end routers, it runs QNX Neutrino. The version used in these routers has a 12KB (not MB) microkernel. Almost all the packet handling is in FPGAs, but the supervision, error handling, etc. are in Cisco applications running on QNX Neutrino.

FreeBSD? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31418750)

Like all Cisco high-end routers, it runs QNX Neutrino. The version used in these routers has a 12KB (not MB) microkernel.
Almost all the packet handling is in FPGAs, but the supervision, error handling, etc. are in Cisco applications running on QNX Neutrino.

I thought newer releases of IOS were based on FreeBSD.

Internet and Internet 2 is smoke in the US of A (5, Interesting)

GPLDAN (732269) | more than 4 years ago | (#31418542)

In Japan, it's pretty easy even in rural areas like Kyoto to order a 100Mb connection and get it at a reasonable rate.

In the States, we're playing on DSL lines that have 2Mb down, when they train up right (which they only do maybe 50% of the time) and other people are using Cable (Charter, Comlast, etc) and maybe that is 5 or maybe 10Mb down. If you are very lucky (and have the coin) maybe you are on AT&T uVerse or Verizon FIOS, and they could give you 100Mb, but you'd pay through the nose for it, and it would be asymmetrical. Most likely (the UVerse people I know) you are getting 10 down.

Now here comes Johnny Chambers saying this beast in the core could give GIG (1000Mb/s) to every person in San Francisco. Johnny's comb over is going to his brain. Just because a TR2N sized CRS-2 with enough horsepower to make the TRON MCP break down and cry comes into the provider core doesn't mean SHIT to you, the end user. Here in the states we won't see Japanese style connectivity for another 10 years. We're being left in the fucking stone age, because they money isn't there to build out past the core.

It pisses me off when Johnny tries to hype and pimp that stock price up, and they use multi-threading and distributed fabrics to get that speed, but we all know it's moving at snail's pace, the industry is consolidating, and unless you live where fiber is, forget it. And save me the "USA is so much bigger than Japan" argument, too. We don't see these speeds in our major cities, like NYC or Atlanta, SF or Chicago. Nothing even close. the SONET rings in these cities are still selling OC multiples at insane prices. It's still fucking 1996 in America.

Re:Internet and Internet 2 is smoke in the US of A (2, Interesting)

sunking2 (521698) | more than 4 years ago | (#31418862)

It's amazing what you can do when your country is bombed into oblivion and then rebuilt (largely thanks to those who bombed) within the last 70 years.

Humanitarian award to Cisco (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31418600)

Coupled with OLPM, imagine all the porn-starved nations this technology could feed.

You're Kidding me, right? (0, Flamebait)

Crypto Gnome (651401) | more than 4 years ago | (#31418612)

Slashdot, MARKETING-FLUFF FOR NERDS, because news doesn't matter.

Near enough to NONE of us will care about this, in the same way that we don't (really) care where our local ISP buys their power from.
  • not relevant
  • not important

Yeah it says Cisco+Internet+Faster in the same breath but

  • Not going to directly impact you
  • not going to impact you in anything like the near future (Carriers do NOT drop millions of dollars on new routers every week, just cause a new product comes out)

Big wow (1)

Jawn98685 (687784) | more than 4 years ago | (#31418740)

Cisco built a bigger, faster router.
Nothing to see here, folks. Move along. Move along. Just Cisco marketing engaging their HYPErdrive by claiming to "...change the Internet forever..." and other HYPErbolic phraseology.

Please...

Bandwidth cap (4, Insightful)

vlm (69642) | more than 4 years ago | (#31418788)

Using a CRS-3, every person in China, which has a population just over 1.3 billion, could participate in a video phone call at the same time. (Or you could pump nearly one Library of Congress per second through the device, or give everyone in San Fransisco a 1Gbps internet connection.)

Or, could exceed their monthly bandwidth "cap" in 155 microseconds. So, what good is it?

Load More Comments
Slashdot Account

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Don't worry, we never post anything without your permission.

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>
Sign up for Slashdot Newsletters
Create a Slashdot Account

Loading...