[104570] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: [NANOG] 10GE router resource
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Henning Brauer)
Mon May 19 02:04:09 2008
Date: Mon, 19 May 2008 08:03:52 +0200
From: Henning Brauer <hb-nanog@bsws.de>
To: Aaron Glenn <aaron.glenn@gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <18f601940803251913t280bf39ehd527ca69fe1ee3b9@mail.gmail.com>
Cc: nanog@nanog.org
Errors-To: nanog-bounces@nanog.org
* Aaron Glenn <aaron.glenn@gmail.com> [2008-03-26 03:14]:
>
> On Tue, Mar 25, 2008 at 6:15 PM, Patrick Clochesy <patrick@chegg.com> wrote:
> > Very interesting study I had not seen, and a bummer. That really puts a
> > cramp in my advocation of our CARP+pf load balancers/firewalls/gateways.
> > Than again, what's a PIX box capable of?
>
> I'd rather tweak a whitebox than pay through the nose for a PIX.
>
> > I also had to switch to OpenBSD as there was a fatal crash with the bridge
> > device in FreeBSD when used with my paticular OpenVPN/CARP/pf combination.
> >
> > AFAIK pf/forwarding only takes place on one core and wouldn't take advantage
> > of the other 3 cores, correct?
>
> Correct. There has been some great speed and efficiency improvements
> in pf and other networking parts of OpenBSD; though from anecdotal
> evidence, 10GbE is not ready for 'primetime' (for certain definitions
> of 'primetime').
>
> actually I'll just skip making an ass out of myself and hope henning@
> chimes in, since I believe he reads NANOG as well.
occasionally.
as with all other OSes constructed benchmarks would show 10GE to work at
wirespeed with reasonable hardware. I would not use it (yet) if I truly
need 10 GBit/s forwarding rate, and that goes for any OS.
--
Henning Brauer, hb@bsws.de, henning@openbsd.org
BS Web Services, http://bsws.de
Full-Service ISP - Secure Hosting, Mail and DNS Services
Dedicated Servers, Rootservers, Application Hosting - Hamburg & Amsterdam
_______________________________________________
NANOG mailing list
NANOG@nanog.org
http://mailman.nanog.org/mailman/listinfo/nanog
