[79690] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: Router choice for medium size hosting provider
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Bill Stewart)
Thu Apr 14 01:26:05 2005
Date: Wed, 13 Apr 2005 22:25:35 -0700
From: Bill Stewart <nonobvious@gmail.com>
Reply-To: Bill Stewart <nonobvious@gmail.com>
To: Bill Woodcock <woody@pch.net>
Cc: =?ISO-8859-2?Q?=A3ukasz_Bromirski?= <lbromirski@mr0vka.eu.org>,
nanog@nanog.org
In-Reply-To: <Pine.SOC.4.61.0504071322060.12058@paixhost.pch.net>
Errors-To: owner-nanog@merit.edu
Cisco's web site has a Miercom report
http://www.cisco.com/application/pdf/en/us/guest/products/ps5854/c1244/cdcc=
ont_0900aecd8017382b.pdf
that tested a bidirectional UDP flow between two 10/100 ports, with
big IP packets,
firewall and NAT running and logging turned on, and they got 130 Mbps. =20
Your mileage may vary, depending on what a "50 Mbps fibre link" is and
what hardware and protocols you're using to support it (ATM? 51 Mbps
SONET channel on OC3? Some kind of fiber Ethernet device?), and if
you're using only 10/100 Mbps Ethernet cards, you'll want to enable
full duplex if you can. Presumably a real application is much faster,
if you don't need all the firewalling and NAT services.
----
Thanks; Bill
Note that this isn't my regular email account - It's still experimental so =
far.
And Google probably logs and indexes everything you send it.
