On 04/16/2010 06:40 AM, Bruce Simpson wrote: > On 04/16/10 11:22, saurabh wrote: >>> I'm deeply concerned that XORP is still not API-stable enough to be used >>> commercially. >>> >> You concern about stability of xorp(1.6) to use in Real world - heavy >> network load >> environment as standalone product ? I think it is well tested. >> > > With respect, this point is not relevant. I presume by 'heavy network > load' you are referring to forwarding performance. > Forwarding performance has nothing to do with XORP, which is control > plane software. The problems are elsewhere. > > Consider: > * XORP was positioned as an 'eXtensible' routing platform.
It supports lots of protocols..seems like that part worked fine. Anyone capable of developing a new protocol for xorp can easily change a few callback signatures and re-compile. > * The components in the system talk to each other over XRL. > * XRL is used as the core API. > * It has been demonstrated to be a source of problems. > * Look at the poor BGP convergence performance. XRL is clearly on the > hot path. > > Ben was proposing piecemeal changes to XRL itself, which effectively > change the core API. > That's fine, but the Linux approach to APIs -- just break them on a > point release -- doesn't scale to real-world use. Instead of hand-waving, why not give a real example? You think someone is going to try to distribute binary xorp modules to work on random Xorp installations or something? Thanks, Ben -- Ben Greear <[email protected]> Candela Technologies Inc http://www.candelatech.com _______________________________________________ Xorp-hackers mailing list [email protected] http://mailman.ICSI.Berkeley.EDU/mailman/listinfo/xorp-hackers
