nanog mailing list archives
Re: Core router bakeoff?
From: "Perry E. Metzger" <perry () piermont com>
Date: Thu, 07 May 1998 17:24:37 -0400
Karl Denninger writes:
You don't want Bay and you certainly don't want 3Com. If your network is fairly slow (ethernets and T1s only) you can use PCs running a reasonable BSD and GateD. Otherwise, the only commercial choice is Cisco.FreeBSD and decent networking cards (ie: Intel PRO100Bs) can route a couple of 100Mbps switched fast ethernets (yes, full duplex too)
Yeah, but you'll have trouble getting decent T3 cards for it. Its true that 100Mbps ethernet should be fine. BTW, NetBSD with the recent flow cache mods can handle at least 150,000 packets per second. We haven't seen what the actual upper limit is, but that number doesn't seem to be eating a lot of CPU.
Contrary to popular belief, national networks are not simple to set up in a way which will insure that they have maximum survivability and performance.
Amen. .pm
Current thread:
- Core router bakeoff? Rob M VanHooren (May 07)
- Re: Core router bakeoff? Perry E. Metzger (May 07)
- Re: Core router bakeoff? Karl Denninger (May 07)
- Re: Core router bakeoff? Perry E. Metzger (May 07)
- Re: Core router bakeoff? Tony Li (May 08)
- Re: Core router bakeoff? Paul Vixie (May 08)
- Re: Core router bakeoff? Neil J. McRae (May 08)
- Re: Core router bakeoff? Paul A Vixie (May 08)
- Re: Core router bakeoff? Tony Li (May 08)
- Re: Core router bakeoff? Karl Denninger (May 07)
- Re: Core router bakeoff? Perry E. Metzger (May 08)
- Re: Core router bakeoff? Tony Li (May 08)
- Re: Core router bakeoff? Perry E. Metzger (May 07)
- Re: Core router bakeoff? Michael H. Lambert (May 08)
- Re: Core router bakeoff? Al Reuben (May 08)
- Re: Core router bakeoff? Jason L. Weisberger (May 08)