[116097] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: What is good in modular routers these days?
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (William Pitcock)
Mon Jul 20 10:59:34 2009
From: William Pitcock <nenolod@systeminplace.net>
To: "Edward B. DREGER" <eddy+public+spam@noc.everquick.net>
In-Reply-To: <Pine.LNX.4.62.0907201121070.13909@pop.ict1.everquick.net>
Date: Mon, 20 Jul 2009 09:58:46 -0500
Cc: nanog@nanog.org
Errors-To: nanog-bounces+nanog.discuss=bloom-picayune.mit.edu@nanog.org
On Mon, 2009-07-20 at 12:02 +0000, Edward B. DREGER wrote:
> MA> Date: Mon, 20 Jul 2009 07:31:13 +0200 (CEST)
> MA> From: Mikael Abrahamsson
>
> MA> > With a little creativity, it can _almost_ be done for IPv4.
> MA>
> MA> That's most likely a big _almost_.
>
> Maybe. And maybe I'm using worst-case synthetic test sets in addition
> to real routing sets.
>
>
> MA> When someone asks for "2600 class router" they probably also want
>
> "2600-like platform"
>
> And I'm unaware of Cisco 2600-class routers that handle anywhere close
> to 10 Gbps.
Ideally the forwarding would be done with ASICs. The Cisco asr1000
class router seems to be what I'm looking for.
>
> MA> WFQ/fairqueue/LLQ, L2TPv3, PPPoE and a heap of other things that
> MA> impede pps quite a lot on a CPU based platform.
>
> Perhaps the OP can clarify whether his omission of these was accidental,
> because such features were assumed, or because he does not need them.
>
I don't need any of that stuff, just BGP, OSPF and fast packet
forwarding for IPv4. But the point is that I need only routing
functionality, I don't need switching functionality like on a Cisco
6500-class system.
William
--
William Pitcock
SystemInPlace - Simple Hosting Solutions
1-800-688-5018
