On Tue, 29 Feb 2000, Nick Bastin wrote:
> >On Mon, 28 Feb 2000, Nick Bastin wrote:
> >
> >> Exactly. The 7206VXR will still outperform a high end linux system,
> >> because there are other demands on the bandwidth of the PCI bus in your
> >> linux system. Also, it's worth noting that while Cisco classifies the 7200
> >> series in their 'High-End Routers', it's a cheap box intended for
> >> enterprise work. The newer 7576 can push 4Gbps sustained across the
> >> chassis, and even the older 7507/7513 can do 2Gbps. I'm not suggesting
> >> that we'll ever get linux to touch the capabilities of a 12000 (or a
> >> Juniper M20/M40), but PC hardware issues aside, the kernel ought to be able
> >> to push packets as well as any Cisco 7xxx series router.
> >
> > This is not what I said. What was said is the 7206VXR with
> >the 300Mhz NMP has *exactly* the same limit as a high end PC...
>
> Well, yes, that wasn't what I meant by exactly. I was simply referring to
> the last comment you made about sharing PCI bus bandwidth. Yet another
> communciations breakdown caused by email.. ;-) (Maybe I should have put a
> however after the exactly?)
>
> > The difference is the Linux box will do this in the slow path,
> >and keep doing it while filtering the traffic, the 7206 dies of NMP
> >overload.
>
> Except, obviously, if you're smart about the modules you run in the 7206,
> you'll never have to worry about hitting this limit. Same goes for the
> linux box, except I can be sure that the 7206 will really pump 600Mbps,
> whereas the PC is susceptible to things like lousy chipsets that can't
> utilize full bus bandwidth and the like. You can get a PC that will
> perform as well as the 7206 at the bus level, but you can't use just any PC.
Correct, when they are build I use very specific components,
as one should when building an important device. A 1000$ desktop will
not replace a 7206, howeven a 4u rackmount costing ~ $5000 will
replace (for most uses) a 30,000$ Cisco 7206.
> > What other demands? A Linux based router is running a bunch
> >of cards, not disks/etc.
>
> Well, on most of my firewalls/routers, I have a PCI video card. It might
> not be doing much, but it's still sucking up some bus bandwidth. Also, if
> I'm running disk at all for some reason, the IDE controller is on my PCI
> bus too. I tend to run disk on the firewalls, and not on the routers,
> although that's mostly a semantic distinction (the firewalls do logging,
> the routers don't, although I could do this over the network too...)
This is what serial console is for, and my routers run from
ramdisk loaded from flash. IF a disk wer required I can see your
point, IDE is an insane resource hog.
---
As folks might have suspected, not much survives except roaches,
and they don't carry large enough packets fast enough...
--About the Internet and nuclear war.
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-net" in
the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
