[28108] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: router interfaces
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Dana Hudes)
Mon Apr 10 23:06:39 2000
Message-ID: <007801bfa362$a68c5380$3d5cdcd1@hudes.org>
From: "Dana Hudes" <dhudes@panix.com>
To: "Chris Cappuccio" <chris@dqc.org>,
"Andrew Brown" <atatat@atatdot.net>
Cc: <nanog@merit.edu>
Date: Mon, 10 Apr 2000 23:04:28 -0400
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Errors-To: owner-nanog-outgoing@merit.edu
Any router with an ATM or Frame Relay interface is going to have lots =
and lots of sub-interfaces.
In provider-customer connections the usual process is to have a /30 and =
the interface is operating in point-point VC mode.
I'm sure folks aggregating onto Frame Relay HSSI from a WAN switch are =
putting more than 50 T1 worth on. I'd hope not since one is paying for =
that T1 but oversubscribing is the game.
So certainly I would expect to see hundreds of interfaces. I'm not =
talking about secondary IP addresses.
On an OC-3 ATM -- I can certainly trunk lots of customers to a single =
BCN with 3 OC-3 interfaces
(dumping that traffic is another problem unless you want Gigabit =
Ethernet or multiple Fast Ethernet full-duplex)
----- Original Message -----=20
From: "Chris Cappuccio" <chris@dqc.org>
To: "Andrew Brown" <atatat@atatdot.net>
Cc: <nanog@merit.edu>
Sent: Monday, April 10, 2000 5:43 PM
Subject: Re: router interfaces
>=20
> This really depends on what software the router is using and how =
optimized it
> is
>=20
> 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!!!
>=20
> As far as max next-hop gateways, this should only be limited by the =
limits of
> the routing table.
>=20
> On Mon, 10 Apr 2000, Andrew Brown wrote:
>=20
> |=20
> | 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.
> |=20
> | 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.
> |=20
> | max interfaces? max next-hop gateways?
> |=20
> | thanks.
> |=20
> | --=20
> | |-----< "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."
> |=20
> |=20
>=20
> ---
> Reverend Chris Cappuccio
> http://www.dqc.org/~chris/
>=20
>=20
