[98518] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: [ppml] too many variables
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (vijay gill)
Fri Aug 10 14:47:10 2007
Date: Fri, 10 Aug 2007 11:33:34 -0700
From: "vijay gill" <vgill@vijaygill.com>
To: ppml@arin.net, nanog@nanog.org
In-Reply-To: <20070810182455.GA57260@ussenterprise.ufp.org>
Errors-To: owner-nanog@merit.edu
------=_Part_6427_30530159.1186770814369
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Disposition: inline
On 8/10/07, Leo Bicknell <bicknell@ufp.org> wrote:
>
> In a message written on Fri, Aug 10, 2007 at 11:08:26AM -0700, vijay gill
> wrote:
> > substantially behind moores observation to be economically viable. I
> > have some small number of route processors in my network and it is a
> > major hassle to get even those few upgraded. In other words, if you
> > have a network that you can upgrade the RPs on every 18 months, let
> me
>
> You're mixing problems.
>
> Even though you may only be able to put in a new route processor
> every 3-5 years doesn't mean the vendor shouldn't have a faster
> version every 18 months, or even sooner. It's the addition of the
> two that's the problem. You're 5 year cycle may come a year before
> the vendors 5 year cycle, putting you on 9 year old gear before you
> refresh next.
The vendor has to qualify, write code for, and support n versions. This IS a
part of the problem. Just blindly swapping out CPUs is non trivial, as any
systems engineer can tell you. The support cost will be passed on to the
consumer.
/vijay
Vendor J got it half right. The RP is a separately replaceable
> component based on a commodity motherboard, hooked in with commodity
> ethernet, using the most popular CPU and ram on the market. And
> yes, I understand needing to pay extra for the sheet metal, cooling
> calculations, and other items.
>
> But, they still cost 10x a PC based on the same components, and are
> upgraded perhaps every 3 years, at best. They don't even take
> advantage of perhaps going from a 2.0Ghz processor to a 2.4, using
> the same motherboard, RAM, disk, etc.
>
> But I think the point still stands, I bet Vendor J in particular
> could pop out a Core 2 Duo based RP with 8 gig of ram and a 300+
> gig hard drive in under 6 months while holding the price point if
> BGP convergence demanded it, and their customers made it a priority.
>
> To Bill's original e-mail. Can we count on 2x every 18 months going
> forward? No. But betting on 2x every 24 months, and accounting for the
> delta between currently shipping and currently available hardware seems
> completely reasonable when assessing the real problem.
>
> --
> Leo Bicknell - bicknell@ufp.org - CCIE 3440
> PGP keys at http://www.ufp.org/~bicknell/
> Read TMBG List - tmbg-list-request@tmbg.org, www.tmbg.org
>
> _______________________________________________
> PPML
> You are receiving this message because you are subscribed to the ARIN
> Public Policy
> Mailing List (PPML@arin.net).
> Unsubscribe or manage your mailing list subscription at:
> http://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/ppml Please contact the ARIN Member
> Services
> Help Desk at info@arin.net if you experience any issues.
>
>
>
------=_Part_6427_30530159.1186770814369
Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Disposition: inline
<br><br><div><span class="gmail_quote">On 8/10/07, <b class="gmail_sendername">Leo Bicknell</b> <<a href="mailto:bicknell@ufp.org">bicknell@ufp.org</a>> wrote:</span><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;">
In a message written on Fri, Aug 10, 2007 at 11:08:26AM -0700, vijay gill wrote:<br>> substantially behind moores observation to be economically viable. I<br>> have some small number of route processors in my network and it is a
<br>> major hassle to get even those few upgraded. In other words, if you<br>> have a network that you can upgrade the RPs on every 18 months, let me<br><br>You're mixing problems.<br><br>Even though you may only be able to put in a new route processor
<br>every 3-5 years doesn't mean the vendor shouldn't have a faster<br>version every 18 months, or even sooner. It's the addition of the<br>two that's the problem. You're 5 year cycle may come a year before
<br>the vendors 5 year cycle, putting you on 9 year old gear before you<br>refresh next.</blockquote><div><br><br>The vendor has to qualify, write code for, and support n versions. This IS a part of the problem. Just blindly swapping out CPUs is non trivial, as any systems engineer can tell you. The support cost will be passed on to the consumer.
<br><br>/vijay<br><br></div><br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;">Vendor J got it half right. The RP is a separately replaceable
<br>component based on a commodity motherboard, hooked in with commodity<br>ethernet, using the most popular CPU and ram on the market. And<br>yes, I understand needing to pay extra for the sheet metal, cooling<br>calculations, and other items.
<br><br>But, they still cost 10x a PC based on the same components, and are<br>upgraded perhaps every 3 years, at best. They don't even take<br>advantage of perhaps going from a 2.0Ghz processor to a 2.4, using<br>the same motherboard, RAM, disk, etc.
<br><br>But I think the point still stands, I bet Vendor J in particular<br>could pop out a Core 2 Duo based RP with 8 gig of ram and a 300+<br>gig hard drive in under 6 months while holding the price point if<br>BGP convergence demanded it, and their customers made it a priority.
<br><br>To Bill's original e-mail. Can we count on 2x every 18 months going<br>forward? No. But betting on 2x every 24 months, and accounting for the<br>delta between currently shipping and currently available hardware seems
<br>completely reasonable when assessing the real problem.<br><br>--<br> Leo Bicknell - <a href="mailto:bicknell@ufp.org">bicknell@ufp.org</a> - CCIE 3440<br> PGP keys at <a href="http://www.ufp.org/~bicknell/">
http://www.ufp.org/~bicknell/</a><br>Read TMBG List - <a href="mailto:tmbg-list-request@tmbg.org">tmbg-list-request@tmbg.org</a>, <a href="http://www.tmbg.org">www.tmbg.org</a><br><br>_______________________________________________
<br>PPML<br>You are receiving this message because you are subscribed to the ARIN Public Policy<br>Mailing List (<a href="mailto:PPML@arin.net">PPML@arin.net</a>).<br>Unsubscribe or manage your mailing list subscription at:
<br><a href="http://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/ppml">http://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/ppml</a> Please contact the ARIN Member Services<br>Help Desk at <a href="mailto:info@arin.net">info@arin.net</a> if you experience any issues.
<br><br><br></blockquote></div><br>
------=_Part_6427_30530159.1186770814369--
