[265] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: CIDR FAQ
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Dave Siegel)
Tue Aug 15 15:30:36 1995
From: Dave Siegel <dsiegel@net99.net>
To: jgs@aads.net (John G. Scudder)
Date: Tue, 15 Aug 1995 12:28:00 -0700 (MST)
Cc: dsiegel@net99.net, inet-access@earth.com, cidrd@iepg.org, nanog@merit.edu,
local-ir@ripe.net, iap@vma.cc.nd.edu
In-Reply-To: <v02120d07ac569fba5ee0@[198.111.96.11]> from "John G. Scudder" at Aug 15, 95 03:12:30 pm
> And Paul Traina wrote something vaguely similar.
>
> I think you guys are both missing what I think was Jon's original point:
> Routers forward packets faster than PCs, but the forwarding function and
> the routing protocol function do not have to reside on the same box. You
> can add a PC (workstation, whatever) which runs the routing protocol and
> stuffs routes into the router. It doesn't have to support the link-layer
> du jour. Ethernet will do the job just fine.
>
> As I recall the original discussion was of colocating a router, to forward
> packets, with a workstation, to compute routes.
>
So what would the normal implementation of such a design be? ebgp-multihop
all of your peers into the PC, and then a single peering session the Cisco,
presuming no "next-hop-self" routes?
I can see some amount of value in such a design, if it could be made to work
correctly. Does anybody have the spare equipment to build a lab? (pfeh, yeah,
right)
Dave
--
Dave Siegel Director of Engineering, Net99
http://www.webcity.com/ (602)249-1083 24x7 NOC line
http://www.rtd.com/~dsiegel/ (520)318-0696 My Tucson Office
