On Thu, Mar 27, 2008, Andrew C Burnette wrote:
> Indeed. PCI-X is already an EOL'ed interface, if only cheap PCI-X cards
> were available. Once you add extensive ACL's, there's loads more
> [central] processing to be done than just packet routing (100k choices
> versus 2 to 4 interfaces). Syst
William Herrin wrote:
On Wed, Mar 26, 2008 at 4:26 PM, Sargun Dhillon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
from a viewpoint of hardware,
x86 is a fairly decent platform. I can stuff 40 (4x10GigE multiplex with
a switch) 1 GigE ports in it. Though, the way that Linux works, it
cannot handle high pac
> FPGAs can be used to do both SRAM and TCAMs. All that is needed
> is an FPGA board with 10G or a 10G card with an FPGA on it.
The Xilinx Virtex family can already do 10G, if you
are into FPGA development (I seem to recall the
first Xilinx FPGA that could do 10G was 4-5 years
ago; forever in Mo
> High-rate routers try to keep the packets in an SRAM queue
> and instead of looking up destinations in a DRAM-based radix
> tree, they use a special memory device called a TCAM.
FPGAs can be used to do both SRAM and TCAMs. All that is needed
is an FPGA board with 10G or a 10G card with an FPG
On Wed, Mar 26, 2008 at 6:54 PM, Sargun Dhillon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I wonder how difficult it would be to integrate such a device on to
> an x86 board cheaply. Something like NetFPGA (http://netfpga.org/) would
> be an interesting place to start. The board has on board SRAM, a bit o
I wonder how difficult it would be to integrate such a device on to
an x86 board cheaply. Something like NetFPGA (http://netfpga.org/) would
be an interesting place to start. The board has on board SRAM, a bit of
DRAM, an FPGA, and 2 GigE interfaces.
I know it definitely isn't normal for
On Wed, Mar 26, 2008 at 4:26 PM, Sargun Dhillon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> from a viewpoint of hardware,
> x86 is a fairly decent platform. I can stuff 40 (4x10GigE multiplex with
> a switch) 1 GigE ports in it. Though, the way that Linux works, it
> cannot handle high packet rates.
Correct
Actually, soon this will no longer be true. Vyatta's new platform,
Glendale, will be moving to Quagga. Quagga is much more stable, and
slow-moving compared to Xorp, which makes me slightly more comfortable
(less breakage between versions). There are some major features lacking
inside of the platf
Actually the latest version of Vyatta uses Quagga. If anyone is
interested in discussing the differences in running the two in
production networks feel free to contact me off list.
In full disclosure, I work for Vyatta.
Cheers,
Robert.
Peter Wohlers wrote:
> Vyatta is built on top of xorp. You
Paul Vixie wrote:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
People rolling their own router are not the only ones who
want to do 10G on Linux.
speaking of which, has anybody run "xorp" in production? it looks as much
like JunOS as quagga/zebra looks like IOS. if "click" works on current
hardware and if th
On Wednesday 26 March 2008, Robert Boyle wrote:
> Even with their specialized hardware platform, bus, and
> extensive tuning, they only get 10Gb/s throughput on the
> dual or quad 10G modules. However you can do 100,000 line
> ACLs at that speed. It is built for a different
> application than core
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
> People rolling their own router are not the only ones who
> want to do 10G on Linux.
speaking of which, has anybody run "xorp" in production? it looks as much
like JunOS as quagga/zebra looks like IOS. if "click" works on current
hardware and if the xorp/click integ
At 09:59 AM 3/26/2008, you wrote:
> Is there a multiport card out there on to which some of the
> forwarding responsibilities can be offloaded? Perhaps the
> CPU doesn't need to see every packet that arrives on the machine.
Am I the only person who has heard of Google?
It didn't take me long
At 09:44 PM 3/25/2008, you wrote:
On Tue, Mar 25, 2008 at 1:59 PM, Chris Grundemann
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Greg has laid out a great bit of information and I would like to add just
> one possibility to the list of budget 10GE routers: Vyatta. According to a
> recent press release from th
Joel Snyder wrote:
>>> Also I'd love to hear recommendatios for "budget" 10GE
>>> routers. The "budget" router would be used to hook up
>>> client networks through one 10GE interface and connect
>>> to different transit providers through two 10GE
>>> interfaces.
If you don't need BGP-ish
>>> Also I'd love to hear recommendatios for "budget" 10GE
>>> routers. The "budget" router would be used to hook up
>>> client networks through one 10GE interface and connect
>>> to different transit providers through two 10GE
>>> interfaces.
If you don't need BGP-ish power, David Newman just p
> From: Mark Tinka <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Date: Mon, 24 Mar 2008 19:12:57 +0800
> Sender: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
> On Monday 24 March 2008, user user wrote:
>
> > Hi everybody!
>
> Hello.
>
> > Also I'd love to hear recommendatios for "budget" 10GE
> > routers. The "budget" router would be used to
On Monday 24 March 2008, user user wrote:
> Hi everybody!
Hello.
> Also I'd love to hear recommendatios for "budget" 10GE
> routers. The "budget" router would be used to hook up
> client networks through one 10GE interface and connect
> to different transit providers through two 10GE
> interface
18 matches
Mail list logo
