[28097] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: router interfaces
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Chris Cappuccio)
Mon Apr 10 17:44:42 2000
Date: Mon, 10 Apr 2000 14:43:25 -0700 (PDT)
From: Chris Cappuccio <chris@dqc.org>
To: Andrew Brown <atatat@atatdot.net>
Cc: nanog@merit.edu
In-Reply-To: <20000410173059.A6490@noc.untraceable.net>
Message-ID: <Pine.BSO.4.21.0004101441180.29064-100000@dqc.org>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Errors-To: owner-nanog-outgoing@merit.edu
This really depends on what software the router is using and how optimized it
is
You can easily have thousands of loopback (or other virtual interfaces) on a
PC router running a free OS. The performance you will get depends on how the
OS handles routing tables and interfaces in the kernel!!!
As far as max next-hop gateways, this should only be limited by the limits of
the routing table.
On Mon, 10 Apr 2000, Andrew Brown wrote:
|
| while arguing routing with a friend of mine, we got to the point where
| the number of interfaces on a router was a point of contention. now
| certainly routing depends not only on the number of interfaces a
| router has, but also on the number of next-hop gateways it need to
| keep track of.
|
| that said, i'd like to just ask: what's the largest number of
| interfaces anyone has on any of their routers? i was arguing that
| high end routes would probably have maybe a few hundred. my friend
| was arguing in terms of theoretical limits and thought it was more
| like tens of thousands.
|
| max interfaces? max next-hop gateways?
|
| thanks.
|
| --
| |-----< "CODE WARRIOR" >-----|
| codewarrior@daemon.org * "ah! i see you have the internet
| twofsonet@graffiti.com (Andrew Brown) that goes *ping*!"
| andrew@crossbar.com * "information is power -- share the wealth."
|
|
---
Reverend Chris Cappuccio
http://www.dqc.org/~chris/
