[36595] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: gigabit router (was Re: Getting a "portable" /19 or /20)
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Rafi Sadowsky)
Wed Apr 11 04:20:35 2001
Date: Wed, 11 Apr 2001 11:15:09 +0300 (IDT)
From: Rafi Sadowsky <rafi-nanog@meron.openu.ac.il>
Reply-To: <nanog@merit.edu>
To: <alex@yuriev.com>
Cc: <nanog@merit.edu>
In-Reply-To: <Pine.LNX.3.96.1010410200131.6377N-100000@cathy.uuworld.com>
Message-ID: <Pine.GSO.4.31.0104111107210.20808-100000@meron.openu.ac.il>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Errors-To: owner-nanog-outgoing@merit.edu
On Tue, 10 Apr 2001 alex@yuriev.com wrote:
>
[deleted]
>
> CEF should be called Customer Enrangement Feature. It is a very very very
> bad idea to have linecards be anything else than forwarders. They should not
> make any intelligent routing decisions. There should not be a tons of copies
> of routing table on line cards. That is what creates problems.
Without getting into whether dCEF(Distributed CEF) is good or bad -
CEF gives a performance boost even on a single CPU box -
Try any 7200 series Cisco as existence proof
>
> Alex
>
Rafi
>
>
