"Not to say you can't route well with a linux or bsd system you can but at the high-end probably not as well."
Tell that to Juniper. Scott Granados wrote: > Remember that a pc may have some certain functions that are "more > powerful" than a router but a pc is a much more general computer. > Routers are supposed to be and usually designed to do one thing only, > route, not play quake, balance your check book, browse the net, etc etc. > So although for example a gsr-12000 may hhave a slower cpu than the > machine on your desk it probably will route and pass more traffic than > your pc ever will because of its design. Not to say you can't route > well with a linux or bsd system you can but at the high-end probably not > as well. > > On Thu, 23 May 2002, Vinny Abello wrote: > > >>I would have to say for any Linux/BSD platform to be a viable routing >>solution, you have to eliminate all moving parts or as much as possible, >>ie. no hard drives because hard drives will fail. Not much you can do about >>the cooling fans in various parts of the machine though which routers also >>tend to have. Solid state storage would be the way to go as far as what the >>OS is installed on. You have to have something to imitate flash on the >>common router. Otherwise, if you can get the functionality out of a PC, I >>say go for it! The processing power of a modern PC is far beyond any router >>I can think of. I suppose it would just be a matter of how efficient your >>kernel, TCP/IP stack and routing daemon would be at that point. :) >> >>At 10:48 PM 5/22/2002, you wrote: >> >> >>>On Wed, 22 May 2002, Andy Dills wrote: >>> >>> >>>>>>From the number of personal replies I got about these topics, it seems >>>>>like many people are interested in sharing information about how to do >>>>>routing on a budget, or how to avoid getting shot in the foot with your >>>>>Cisco box. >>>> >>>>Routing on a budget? Dude, you can buy a 7200 for $2 grand. Why bother >>>>with a linux box? Heh, at least use FreeBSD :) >>> >>>Before the dot com implosion, they weren't nearly that inexpensive. The >>>average corporate user will also need smartnet (what's that on a 7200, a K >>>or a few per year?) for support, warranty, and software updates. Some >>>people just don't appreciate being nickled and dimed by cisco and forced >>>to either buy much more router than they need, or risk ending up with >>>another cisco boat anchor router when the platform they chose can no >>>longer do the job in the limited memory config supported. >>> >>>I have a consulting customer who, against my strong recommendation, bought >>>a non-cisco router to multihome with. It's PC based, runs Linux, and with >>>the exception of the gated BGP issue that bit everyone running gated a few >>>months ago, has worked just fine. It's not as easy to work with in most >>>cases, but there are some definite advantages, and some things that Linux >>>actually makes easier. They'd initially bought a 2621 when multihoming >>>was just a thought, and by the time it was a reality, 64mb on a 2621 >>>couldn't handle full routes. The C&W/PSI depeering (which did affect >>>this customer, as they were single homed to C&W at the time and did >>>regular business with networks single homed to PSI) was proof that without >>>full routes, you're not really multihomed. >>> >>>-- >>>---------------------------------------------------------------------- >>> Jon Lewis *[EMAIL PROTECTED]*| I route >>> System Administrator | therefore you are >>> Atlantic Net | >>>_________ http://www.lewis.org/~jlewis/pgp for PGP public key_________ >> >> >>Vinny Abello >>Network Engineer >>Server Management >>[EMAIL PROTECTED] >>(973)300-9211 x 125 >>(973)940-6125 (Direct) >> >>Tellurian Networks - The Ultimate Internet Connection >>http://www.tellurian.com (888)TELLURIAN >> > >
