Hi, I have 2 fiber links which will enter the CCR1009 and both are 300Mbps each.
So, its like 600Mbps set to load balancing and 90% of time, I will have 75% load on this.

My plans will be 10,20,30,50,100Mbps plans to my customers.

So, my question is can CCR1009 handle this or shall I look for some other model ?

Customer base we are talking here is around 1500 customers.

It depends on how you are delivering service and rate limits to the end users. If the CCR is just routing, yes it is able to handle that.
http://routerboard.com/CCR1009-8G-1S

However if it needs to do queues, PPPoE/Hotspot, QoS, etc. that may become an issue.

It depends on how you are delivering service and rate limits to the end users. If the CCR is just routing, yes it is able to handle that.
http://routerboard.com/CCR1009-8G-1S

However if it needs to do queues, PPPoE/Hotspot, QoS, etc. that may become an issue.

Yes, I have that exact model.
Yes, we have 70% HotSpot customers (24x7 online) and 30% PPPoE customers (business offices 24x7 online).

So which model do you suggest ?

Unfortunately I'm not an ISP, so I have very little experiance in your specific use case. Someone with more experiance will probably chime in and correct me if I am wrong. I would probalby go in with a CCR 1036 or an x86 solution to be on the safe side of things. Being able to handle the bandwidth isn't a big concern, it's the other services you are running on top of everything else that is. I'm not sure how optimized the CCR series is yet for things like PPPoE or the Hotspot processes with multiple cores.

I would look to speed up and optimize the hotspot as much as possible as well to keep processing time down, since most of your customer base uses that, that will be where the greatest benfits come from. Fewi back in 2010 did a good presentation on how to do that.
http://mum.mikrotik.com/presentations/U ... xWindt.pdf

You really won't be able to use fast path because of needing to use Queues to limit traffic on a per user basis, so the performance nubmers using fast path are out of the picture.

Okay waiting for more views.

While it can probably handle that given the generic parameters specified (the devil is in the details), I would suggest you build a design which allows you to easily scale horizontally. In other words, create a design where you can simply add another CCR if you start to hit limits on the first CCR.

While it can probably handle that given the generic parameters specified (the devil is in the details), I would suggest you build a design which allows you to easily scale horizontally. In other words, create a design where you can simply add another CCR if you start to hit limits on the first CCR.

Friend, I just made a new network design for my company.
See attached and share your views please.
I need my new design to be future proof till 4000-5000 customers handling power.

I would probably use a switch to bring the connections in where the CCR1009 is, use VLANS where needed to separate the subnets and then trunk the CCR1009 into the switch. That way it is much easier to add another CCR if the need arises without recabling.

As for your original question, with 1500 Customers on PPPoE + queues and traffic, I might consider a 1016 or higher ensure you have plenty of resources, but a 1009 might do the job depending on what other CPU intensive features get turned on.

Another option would be to plug an ESXi (or other hypervisor) server host into the switch and then bring up RouterOS VMs as needed to meet capacity. We are seeing more and more of this type of deployment in Data Centers and Service Providers.

I agree with IPANetEngineer.

Use a switch in front of the CCR to provide you the flexibility to replace the CCR later with minimal downtime.

Just be aware that bonding doesn't currently support fast-path.

Just be aware that bonding doesn't currently support fast-path.

Haven't run into that yet...man that sucks Most of our designs rely heavily on LACP. It would be nice to see fastpath support for bonding...hopefully that is on the roadmap.

in the posted diagram (stripping the servers) i would use a ccr1009 for bgp since only for routing it can handle 900Mbit+ without breaking a sweat.
The router where you connect your customers i would start with a ccr1009, and if that is not enough performance/wise to handle all the customers (i have like 500 queues, ~1500 firewall rules on my router and it's handling about 600Mbit without increased latency) i would divide my customers and add another one in parallel. Also, if you are using a PPPoE setup I think you can have more than one router acting as a pppoe concentrator on a single vlan, so you can have all routers "listening" for clients in all vlans, providing some kind of load balancing and protection in case one of them fails.

Let us know what you decide to to

Haven't run into that yet...man that sucks Most of our designs rely heavily on LACP. It would be nice to see fastpath support for bonding...hopefully that is on the roadmap.

As do ours, currently RouterOS has fast-path on bonding RX but not TX. Email support@mikrotik.com and pledge your support for fast-path on bonding, it will help convince them to put dev resource behind it.

in the posted diagram (stripping the servers) i would use a ccr1009 for bgp since only for routing it can handle 900Mbit+ without breaking a sweat.
The router where you connect your customers i would start with a ccr1009, and if that is not enough performance/wise to handle all the customers (i have like 500 queues, ~1500 firewall rules on my router and it's handling about 600Mbit without increased latency) i would divide my customers and add another one in parallel. Also, if you are using a PPPoE setup I think you can have more than one router acting as a pppoe concentrator on a single vlan, so you can have all routers "listening" for clients in all vlans, providing some kind of load balancing and protection in case one of them fails.

Let us know what you decide to to

You mean swap the position ?

Put 1009 as core router and use 1036 as NAS ?

exactly. You shouldn't need 36 cores for bgp and simple routing at those speeds.
What do you mean by NAS?

exactly. You shouldn't need 36 cores for bgp and simple routing at those speeds.
What do you mean by NAS?

I use hotspot and PPPoE both.
We dont provide real hotspot, but our broadband customers are connected in login system.
Means they login and use internet.

For that reason, we use NAS!
So The Microtik works as NAS there.

We use Hotspot login for Home Customers and PPPoE for business customers.

Got my point ?

yep

yep

So we need more power for whom ?
CORE or NAS ?

Accordingly, will place the 1009 and 1036 then.

you need more power for nas, because I suppose there you'll have the queues for the subscriptions, the pppoe concentrator, probably firewall and so on.

I am running bgp on a rb1100ah with a 500Mbit main connection and another 100Mbit backup connection and the load peaks at around 25%. CCR1009 has at least 5x more performance than 1100.
BGP is not cpu-intensive if you don't hammer the router with a lot of full routing tables (which naturally carry a lot of updates), and even if you do that, 29 extra cores won't help at all since in the current version of routeros the bgp process is still single-core.

Summing all up you should use the 1009 for bgp and 1036 for nas. Even another 1009 would be enough for the nas, but if you already have those 2 routers use them as written above.

you need more power for nas, because I suppose there you'll have the queues for the subscriptions, the pppoe concentrator, probably firewall and so on.

I am running bgp on a rb1100ah with a 500Mbit main connection and another 100Mbit backup connection and the load peaks at around 25%. CCR1009 has at least 5x more performance than 1100.
BGP is not cpu-intensive if you don't hammer the router with a lot of full routing tables (which naturally carry a lot of updates), and even if you do that, 29 extra cores won't help at all since in the current version of routeros the bgp process is still single-core.

Summing all up you should use the 1009 for bgp and 1036 for nas. Even another 1009 would be enough for the nas, but if you already have those 2 routers use them as written above.

I currently have CCR1009 as my core and my NAS is a assembled CPU with Router OS6.28 license.
Attached is my config.
Do you think, it can handle upto 1500 customers easily ?

I moved from core2quad 3Ghz+ boxes doing shaping and firewalling for 600 customers each having multiple computers/ips using up to 400Mbit with 95% cpu load to ccr1009 doing exactly the same thing. Now cpu load is in the 20% range and i can further push around 350-400Mbit through ccr with no problems.
I'm not doing pppoe, so this might take additional cpu cycles.
But my experience of moving from x86 to ccr1009 was a veeery sweet one. So much more performance. No more irq issues. No more bus limitations.

I think it should work for you too, but you should try before you buy if you have the chance.

What's your load on the 1009?

I moved from core2quad 3Ghz+ boxes doing shaping and firewalling for 600 customers each having multiple computers/ips using up to 400Mbit with 95% cpu load to ccr1009 doing exactly the same thing. Now cpu load is in the 20% range and i can further push around 350-400Mbit through ccr with no problems.
I'm not doing pppoe, so this might take additional cpu cycles.
But my experience of moving from x86 to ccr1009 was a veeery sweet one. So much more performance. No more irq issues. No more bus limitations.

I think it should work for you too, but you should try before you buy if you have the chance.

What's your load on the 1009?

I have 200 customers now and my CPU is 2-3% , for 98% of the day.

try to swap boxes

try to swap boxes

Sorry ?

try to swap boxes

instead of 1036, can I buy another 1009 and can it serve flawless till 1500-2000 customers ?

I agree with IPANetEngineer.

Use a switch in front of the CCR to provide you the flexibility to replace the CCR later with minimal downtime.

Just be aware that bonding doesn't currently support fast-path.

You mean in front of CCR1009 or CCR1036 ?
Which switch you recommend ?

I already have a CRS125 switch connected after CCR1009.

try to swap boxes

instead of 1036, can I buy another 1009 and can it serve flawless till 1500-2000 customers ?

in principle yes. However, it depends on how much bandwidth you are using, how many firewall rules per ip, how many ip's you have there.
Generally should work. But if your specific firewall requires 50 rules/ip, then maybe is not the case.
Best thing is to try.

try to swap boxes

instead of 1036, can I buy another 1009 and can it serve flawless till 1500-2000 customers ?

in principle yes. However, it depends on how much bandwidth you are using, how many firewall rules per ip, how many ip's you have there.
Generally should work. But if your specific firewall requires 50 rules/ip, then maybe is not the case.
Best thing is to try.

I just ordered another 1009, as I could not afford 1036 right now.
So, 1009 will be my core and 1009 will be my NAS.
Both the same.

For next 2 years, I will at max reach 500Mbps and 2000 customers.
I think it can handle it very easily.