This was "packet rat". +2 points to id what pack is sitting on, +10 if you know the specific phone device to the rear.
@jtk looks like a cat6k to me?

@ricci Close enough. I think it might have been a 5509. This an old picture from a lab I ran, and being from around 2002, I don't think I would have had a 6509 to play around with, they were too valuable to us at the time. But I could be wrong.

Another picture of it here. Is that a 6509 or 5509? I can't tell by looking anymore, been awhile since I've touched either.

https://web.archive.org/web/20190710032737/http://condor.depaul.edu/jkristof/technotes/incident-response.html

How DePaul University Does Incident Response

@jtk @ricci I am voting 5513.

Same amount of fan inlets on the 6509 and the 5513 I believe (same physical size?) but the 5513 was higher density with thinner cards.

Also seems like the supervisor is in the top slot vs the 6509 that required you to install the sup in slot 5/6 (near the bottom)

@jtk @ricci I used to run Cat 5505s and 6509-Es for many years. Honestly the 6509E was probably the most reliable box I ever had the pleasure to use even now.

When the apocalypse happens it’ll be cockroaches and 6509s left.

@fatred @ricci It was reliable, but they really burned a hole in the corporate wallet when you had to upgrade sup cards every few years.
@jtk @fatred classic Cisco
@ricci @jtk @fatred remember running 6509 as an under powered #BGP router (for 2 full feeds at the time) - the memory might have got full to the extent it was unable to "write term" its configuration, but still forwarding and not crashing.