|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| home | help | back | first | fref | pref | prev | next | nref | lref | last | post |
From: Joel Jaeggli <joelja@bogus.com> To: "Nathanael C. Cariaga" <nccariaga@stluke.com.ph> In-Reply-To: <553474862.6446.1285494100818.JavaMail.root@mailserver> Date: Sun, 26 Sep 2010 10:03:53 -0700 Cc: "nanog@nanog.org" <nanog@nanog.org> Errors-To: nanog-bounces+nanog.discuss=bloom-picayune.mit.edu@nanog.org If one has a cisco 7200, then you have a software based border router. Considerations, for a given router platform are capacity, = susceptability to dos, features required etc. Depending on the capacity = required a software device could do fine. If it's in front of hosting = environment you want to know that it doesn't take dirt nap from a couple = hundred mb/s of small packet. Joel's widget number 2 On Sep 26, 2010, at 2:41, "Nathanael C. Cariaga" = <nccariaga@stluke.com.ph> wrote: > Hi All!=20 >=20 >=20 > Just want to ask if anyone here had experience deploying = software-based routers to serve as perimeter / border router? How does = it gauge with hardware-based routers? Any past experiences will be very = much appreciated.=20 >=20 >=20 > I wanted to know because we've been asked if we want to assume full = control of the internet link (up to the router). By assuming control up = to the router, we still want to configure iBGP with our parent network = so that we can take advantage of some routes available to the parent = network's gateway. The saddest part is presently we do not have the = router to serve as our gateway this is why we are considering the use of = software-based routers.=20 >=20 >=20 > Thank you.=20 >=20
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| home | help | back | first | fref | pref | prev | next | nref | lref | last | post |