nanog mailing list archives
RE: gigabit router (was Re: Getting a "portable" /19 or /20)
From: "Kavi, Prabhu" <prabhu_kavi () tenornetworks com>
Date: Wed, 11 Apr 2001 18:41:29 -0400
You misunderstand. Getting multiple forwarding tables synchronized on one box IS simple, if the architecture considered it from the start. Trying to bolt it on later can cause problems, however. These problems are an implementation issue on a particular platform. As a counterpoint to what you say, consider that all commonly deployed routers that can handle OC-192 rates do NOT have a single centralized forwarding engine. Or do you know something about KISS that was not apparent to those who designed these working products? Prabhu
-----Original Message----- From: alex () yuriev com [mailto:alex () yuriev com] Sent: Wednesday, April 11, 2001 4:41 PM To: nanog () merit edu Subject: RE: gigabit router (was Re: Getting a "portable" /19 or /20)Vendors have known how to solve this problem for many years. Failure to do so is a poor implementation and has nothing to do with centralized forwarding being better/worse than distributed forwarding.Yet another person who does not understand the KISS principle. I am sure in theory it all works great, though I am seeing way too many comments similiar to: "The connectivity issues have been resolved. This appears to be the same CEF related issues we experienced Monday evening, and we have a case open with Cisco. As we get more information from Cisco, we will be passing it along." Alex
Current thread:
- Re: gigabit router (was Re: Getting a "portable" /19 or /20), (continued)
- Re: gigabit router (was Re: Getting a "portable" /19 or /20) Sean M. Doran (Apr 10)
- Re: gigabit router (was Re: Getting a "portable" /19 or /20) Craig Partridge (Apr 11)
- Looking for a NOC contact Walters (Apr 13)
- Re: gigabit router (was Re: Getting a "portable" /19 or /20) Craig Partridge (Apr 11)
- RE: gigabit router (was Re: Getting a "portable" /19 or /20) Kavi, Prabhu (Apr 11)
- RE: gigabit router (was Re: Getting a "portable" /19 or /20) alex (Apr 11)
- Re: gigabit router (was Re: Getting a "portable" /19 or /20) Matt Zimmerman (Apr 12)
- Re: gigabit router (was Re: Getting a "portable" /19 or /20) Craig Partridge (Apr 12)
- Re: gigabit router (was Re: Getting a "portable" /19 or /20) Matt Zimmerman (Apr 12)
- Re: gigabit router (was Re: Getting a "portable" /19 or /20) Sean M. Doran (Apr 10)
- RE: gigabit router (was Re: Getting a "portable" /19 or /20) Richard A. Steenbergen (Apr 11)
- RE: gigabit router (was Re: Getting a "portable" /19 or /20) Kavi, Prabhu (Apr 11)
- [no subject] alex (Apr 11)
- RE: gigabit router (was Re: Getting a "portable" /19 or /20) alex (Apr 11)
- RE: gigabit router (was Re: Getting a "portable" /19 or /20) Vijay Gill (Apr 11)
- RE: gigabit router (was Re: Getting a "portable" /19 or /20) alex (Apr 11)
- RE: gigabit router (was Re: Getting a "portable" /19 or /20) Vijay Gill (Apr 11)
- RE: gigabit router (was Re: Getting a "portable" /19 or /20) Vijay Gill (Apr 11)