routing meltdown

Kent W. England kwe at
Wed Aug 16 04:47:10 UTC 1995

At 2:08 PM 8/11/95, Paul A Vixie wrote:
>I clearly think that colocated workstations are better than route processors
>inside the routers themselves.  I'm less certain that they are better than
>route servers and a unified/recursive/realtime RADB.  I'm not sure at all
>that any interconnect can, should, or ever shall require this kind of dual-
>routing setup for its members.  In other words, why are we discussing this?

I like the idea of workstation-based route processors over
forwarding/routing engines because it decouples the complex route
processing s/w environment from the forwarding function.

The economics of complex route processing don't match the economics of big
honking routers and workstations are a better development environment.

The reason to talk about it here is that if we are to move forward in this
direction we need a simple exchange protocol between route server and
forwarding engine to make this happen.


More information about the NANOG mailing list