nanog mailing list archives

Re: vyatta for bgp


From: Brandon Galbraith <brandon.galbraith () gmail com>
Date: Wed, 21 Sep 2011 16:41:12 -0700

On Wed, Sep 21, 2011 at 4:14 PM, Andreas Echavez <andreas () livejournalinc com
wrote:


The most reliable/cost effective solution is the cheap and redundant
approach to architecture.

Reliable hardware is incredibly inexpensive, and every year we get better
CPUs and (recently) GPUs that are providing APIs and interfaces to their
incredible parallel processing capability.

-Andreas


+1 Scaling Horizontally. Applies to your networking gear, your applications,
etc. If you assume anything is going to break, just get more and
scale/architect properly.



On Thu, Sep 15, 2011 at 6:51 AM, Alain Hebert <ahebert () pubnix net> wrote:

    Hi,

   As usual this end-up in what people prefer.

   Vyatta is as good as the hardware it runs on, the backend they use and
the people configuring/maintaining it.

   The nature of ASIC make it more reliable than a multi-purpose device
(aka server) running an OS written for it.

   It end up being a choice between risk and cost and being that you can
get your hand on second hand iron for cheap these days...

   Why risk it.


-----
Alain Hebert                                ahebert () pubnix net
PubNIX Inc.
50 boul. St-Charles
P.O. Box 26770     Beaconsfield, Quebec     H9W 6G7
Tel: 514-990-5911  http://www.pubnix.net    Fax: 514-990-9443


On 09/15/11 09:05, Ray Soucy wrote:

Is Vyatta really not suited for the task?

I keep checking up on it and holding off looking into it as they don't
support multicast yet.

Modern commodity sever hardware these days often out-powers big iron
enough to make up for not using ASICs, though, at least on the lower
end of the spectrum.

Does anyone have any more details on Vyatta not scaling?  Were you
trying to run it as a VM?  What were you using for NICs? etc.

The hardware matters.  Saying Vyatta doesn't cut it could mean
anything...

On Tue, Sep 13, 2011 at 7:36 PM, Dobbins, Roland<rdobbins () arbor net>
 wrote:

On Sep 14, 2011, at 5:54 AM, Deepak Jain wrote:

 Some enterprises get MPLS L3 VPN service from their providers, and
need
boxes that can route packets to it and speak BGP to inject their
routes.
 They are not, per se, connected to the Internet, and thus won't be
"zorched", at least in the sense you are using it.

Hence 'public-facing'.

;>

------------------------------**------------------------------**
-----------
Roland Dobbins<rdobbins () arbor net>  //<http://www.arbornetworks.**com<
http://www.arbornetworks.com>


               The basis of optimism is sheer terror.

                         -- Oscar Wilde











-- 
Brandon Galbraith
US Voice: 630.492.0464


Current thread: