[84611] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: image stream routers
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (tony sarendal)
Sat Sep 17 14:25:31 2005
Date: Sat, 17 Sep 2005 19:25:03 +0100
From: tony sarendal <dualcyclone@gmail.com>
Reply-To: dualcyclone@gmail.com
To: nanog@merit.edu
In-Reply-To: <ad7542dc0509171038af80999@mail.gmail.com>
Errors-To: owner-nanog@merit.edu
On 17/09/05, tony sarendal <dualcyclone@gmail.com> wrote:
> On 17/09/05, sthaug@nethelp.no <sthaug@nethelp.no> wrote:
> > > A collegue smartbits tested a 1GHz pc, with a full feed and 250k
> > > simoultaneons flows it managed around 250kpps. This also with freebsd
> > > and device polling. It sounds to me like a software based machine can
> > > be plenty fast with good code under the hood.
> >
> > Sorry, in today's world of high-end routers 250kpps doesn't qualify as
> > "plenty fast". Can your box do linerate Gigabit Ethernet with minimum
> > size packets, on several ports simultaneously?
> >
>=20
> I didn't say that a 250kpps box was a high-end box.
> One reliable Mpps is not high-end either, but it can carry quite a lot
> of Mbps. What is C or M price for a reliable full feed Mpps ?
>=20
> "My" high-end boxes never manage to impress me with their pps
> capability before I'm disapointed in their reliability.
>=20
I'll reply to myself before Steinar does =3D)
>It sounds to me like a software based machine can
> be plenty fast with good code under the hood.
In my experience a datacenter pumping out 1Gbps is usually doing
200-250kpps in that direction. Considering this a box capable of
around 1Mbps is "plenty fast".
pps/$ would be pretty good if I could use those in real life...
/Tony
--=20
Tony Sarendal - dualcyclone@gmail.com
IP/Unix
-=3D The scorpion replied,
"I couldn't help it, it's my nature" =3D-
