In article , IMRAN BHATTI wrote: :interface type is V.35 :Actually basic concern is that is WIC-1T or WIC-2T support the 4Mbps :and 2 Mbps
:I Think 1760 is enough for routing but i am confused on the interface used :as i read somehere on cisco.com that Wic-1T does not support data rate :more than 2 Mbps.
formatting link
shows a maximum speed for the WIC-1T of 2.048 Mbps.
formatting link
When used in the 1700, the WIC-2T provides dual 2.048 Mbps ports.
When used in the NM-1FE1R2W or NM-1FE2W or NM-2FE2W or NM-2W or
2600 WIC slot, the WIC-2T supports two ports at up to 4 Mbps each.
The NM-1FE1R2W requires a Cisco 3745 (the page says). The NM-1FE2W requires a Cisco 3620, 3640, 3660, or 3745. The NM-2FE2W requires a Cisco 3620, 3640, or 3660. The NM-2W requires a Cisco 2600, 2600XM, 3620, 3640, or 3660.
Possibly one or more of the above are supported in the 1800 or 2800.
:I Think 1760 is enough for routing but i am confused on the interface used
formatting link
If you look at the 1700 series in that table, you will see that all members of the series are rated at less than 1 Mbps if process switching is being used. If CEF is being used (which you can probably use in your case), the models that are rated at 6.0 Mb or higher are: 1701, 1721, 1751 - 6.14 1711/1712 - 6.91 1760 - 8.19 and the models that fail are: 1710 - 3.58 1720, 1750 - 4.35
Thus, the 1760 that you mention is the only one of the 17xx bunch that would have any "spare" CPU power to speak of, and even that is fairly risky as the base rate isn't even 1.0 Mbps.
But it's moot as the 1760 only supports the WIC-2T as dual 2.048 (unless the reference page is too old to happen to mention one of the appropriate WIC carriers as being available for it.)
But as long as we are at the performance table, have a look at the 2811 rating, 61.44 Mbps. Looks like enough to support several WIC-2T, right? But if one looks closer under the hood, the story becomes extremely different and even 4.0 Mbps can be too much for the 2811 -- and so could very likely be made to overwhelm the
8-times slower 1760. See my analysis at
formatting link
It depends a lot upon your packet distribution, of course, but under my analysis, if you want to be -sure- you can support 6.0 Mbps, you should be using at least a 2851, and
*none* of the models listed in the earlier part of the message are sufficient.