> When an ISP buys a router does it want a worst-case guarantee about the > router's capabilities? Or will it buy a router which can give better > performance in the average case (it may drop some packets if the traffic > pattern changes suddenly)? Assuming both cost the same.
Worst case guarantee is necessary in many cases. Easy example: A router that can handle an STM-1 of regular Internet traffic is worthless to us if it dies in the face of an STM-1 with minimum sized attack traffic. Steinar Haug, Nethelp consulting, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
