[99037] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: "2M today, 10M with no change in technology"? An informal survey.
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Deepak Jain)
Thu Aug 30 14:12:17 2007
Date: Thu, 30 Aug 2007 14:10:03 -0400
From: Deepak Jain <deepak@ai.net>
Reply-To: deepak@ai.net
To: bmanning@vacation.karoshi.com
CC: Jon Lewis <jlewis@lewis.org>, David Conrad <drc@virtualized.org>,
nanog list <nanog@merit.edu>
In-Reply-To: <20070830044757.GA29888@vacation.karoshi.com.>
Errors-To: owner-nanog@merit.edu
bmanning@vacation.karoshi.com wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 29, 2007 at 06:48:43PM -0400, Jon Lewis wrote:
>> On Mon, 27 Aug 2007, David Conrad wrote:
>>
>>> For a few more months. What are upgrade cycles like again? How common
>>> are the MSFC2s?
>> I think we'll find out in a few months, when the "internet breaks" in a
>> whole bunch of places where the admins aren't aware of this issue or
>> operations have been downsized to the point that things are mostly on
>> auto-pilot. I'm guessing there are a good number of Sup2's in use, and
>> that a good % of them think they're fine...as they have 512MB RAM and on
>> the software based routers, that's plenty for current full BGP routes.
>
> private replies suggest (w/ lots of handwaving) that perhaps 20-35%
> of the forwarding engines in use might fit this catagory.
>
>> Anyone want to bet there will be people posting to nanog and cisco-nsp in
>> a few months asking why either the CPU load on their Sup2's has suddenly
>> shot up or why they keep noticing parts of the internet have gone
>> unreachable?...oblivious to this thread.
>
> that would be a sucker bet
>
If Cisco could ship enough units when asked, I'd say their next couple
of quarters are in the bag... but since they have such huge lead
times..... well, I am guessing a lot of people will start considering
taking partial routes.
Transit providers would do well to have a distribute-list or similar
configured to offer these guys when they call rather than trying to
engineer something on an ICB basis.
Deepak
