[36289] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: Faster 'Net growth rate raises fears about routers
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Travis Pugh)
Mon Apr 2 07:58:00 2001
Date: Mon, 2 Apr 2001 07:55:34 -0400 (EDT)
From: Travis Pugh <tpugh@shore.net>
To: Hank Nussbacher <hank@att.net.il>
Cc: nanog@merit.edu
In-Reply-To: <4.3.2.7.2.20010402131353.00aada60@max.ibm.net.il>
Message-ID: <Pine.GSO.4.21.0104020751200.27902-100000@cider.ecosoft.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Errors-To: owner-nanog-outgoing@merit.edu
Not to oversimplify, but assuming we can continue to separate forwarding
from the routing process itself, is this really a situation that calls for
a complete redesign of BGP? If you look at the routing processors on
Cisco and Juniper hardware, Cisco's GSR is using a 200Mhz MIPS RISC
processor and Juniper is using a 333Mhz Mobile Pentium II.
With RISC reaching 1Ghz and Intel pushing 2Ghz, it appears that the actual
processors in use by the 2 big vendors are a couple of years behind. What
happens to the boxes ability to process a 500,000 route table if you
quadruple it's memory and give it 5 times more processing power?
Also, it would likely require a re-write of software, but what's keeping
us from using SMP in routers?
Cheers.
-travis
On Mon, 2 Apr 2001, Hank Nussbacher wrote:
>
> I have a feeling this one may start another very large NANOG thread:
>
> http://www.nwfusion.com/news/2001/0402routing.html
>
> -Hank
>
>
>
