nanog mailing list archives
Re: Force10 Gear
From: "Matthew Petach" <mpetach () netflight com>
Date: Sun, 7 Sep 2008 15:41:37 -0700
On 9/7/08, Frank Bulk <frnkblk () iname com> wrote:
I think it would be interesting to put a table of routing devices together along with the commands it takes to knock down their forwarding rates. And to find out what platform has the higher percentage drop in forwarding rate. As mentioned elsewhere, it's not the pps, but operations per second.
Send a 3kpps stream of multicast packets with TTL=1 towards a sup720 and you can watch it keel over and cry uncle. It really, really doesn't take much these days to kill high-end hardware; they're so optimized for a specific class of traffic that they handle well in hardware, as that's what the bulk of the normal traffic is, and that's what the marketing department needs to chase to keep up with the competition; any traffic profile outside of that doesn't get the same focus from the hardware forwarding teams because that's not where the pressure to keep up from the marketplace is coming from. *Nobody* goes out and says "I have $10M to spend on routers, but to qualify they must be able to forward 10Mpps of IPv4 packets with IP options enabled, sustained rate, with no loss". That's just not a driving market force right now. I think you would find that your table simply reflects what the *bulk* of the traffic profiles from major customers represent; those areas that cause the routers pain in terms of forwarding are exactly those traffic patterns that are *not* highly represented among the majority of the customer base. Matt
Current thread:
- Re: Force10 Gear David Newman (Sep 07)
- Re: Force10 Gear Adrian Chadd (Sep 07)
- Re: Force10 Gear David Newman (Sep 07)
- RE: Force10 Gear Frank Bulk (Sep 07)
- Re: Force10 Gear Matthew Petach (Sep 07)
- <Possible follow-ups>
- RE: Force10 Gear *Hobbit* (Sep 07)
- Re: Force10 Gear Adrian Chadd (Sep 07)