nanog mailing list archives
Re: Ping flooding (fwd)
From: Dorian Kim <dorian () cic net>
Date: Wed, 10 Jul 1996 04:34:57 -0400 (EDT)
On Wed, 10 Jul 1996, Sean Doran wrote:
The current path appears -- to me, qualitatively -- to consume less CPU per packet per second in 7500s than the other released switching methods. Yes, I was seriously surprised too, however People That Know with three letter logins weren't.
With about 32K active flows, I've seen the same Without hard numbers, I'd put the performance gain at 5-10% CPU over other fast switching method, but then again, that's a total eyeball estimate. Pretty amazing stuff.
conf t flow-export <ip-address> ^Z
Minor nit. ip flow-export <ip-address> ^^ :) It's always nice to see new technology being introduced. Flow switching, along with Nevin Brownlee's real time flow visualisation tools should allow us much better view into what's going on in our networks, an always useful thing IMO. -dorian - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Current thread:
- Re: Ping flooding (fwd), (continued)
- Re: Ping flooding (fwd) Todd Graham Lewis (Jul 09)
- Re: Ping flooding (fwd) Justin W. Newton (Jul 09)
- Re: Ping flooding (fwd) George Herbert (Jul 09)
- Re: Ping flooding (fwd) Forrest W. Christian (Jul 09)
- Re: Ping flooding (fwd) Justin W. Newton (Jul 09)
- Re: Ping flooding (fwd) Doug Stanfield (Jul 09)
- Re: Ping flooding (fwd) Curtis Villamizar (Jul 09)
- Re: Ping flooding (fwd) Vadim Antonov (Jul 09)
- Re: Ping flooding Jerry Anderson (Jul 09)
- Re: Ping flooding (fwd) Sean Doran (Jul 09)
- Re: Ping flooding (fwd) Dorian Kim (Jul 10)
- Re: Ping flooding (fwd) Sean Doran (Jul 09)
- Re: Ping flooding (fwd) Sean Doran (Jul 09)
- Re: Ping flooding (fwd) Daniel W. McRobb (Jul 09)
- Re: Ping flooding (fwd) Curtis Villamizar (Jul 10)