GigaRouter (Was Re: Cisco as Big Brother))

Mon Oct 21 03:27:45 UTC 1996

> Yes, the prob is that it uses the CPU to do the BGP stuff and to route
> packets. This is a bad way to do it, you dont want to use your CPU to move
> the packets.

I said how it could be done, not that it ought to be done.  I have found
a P5-150 with BSD/OS, GateD, ScreenD, and DEC FDDI or Ether (PCI DMA either
way) to be a perfectly useful gateway/firewall.  It won't do full FDDI but
my root name server can't tell the difference so I must not be facing that
load.  I've also run four T1's, or 64 28.8K modems, through one of these
boxes.  But the bit and packet loads in these cases are "trivial" compared
to a core router inside any nationwide/worldwide network, either Inter or
Intra.  When only a Cisco or Netstar will do, my boxes are toys.  But the
world has an ongoing need for more toys -- not every router is doing 300K
packets per second with multiple OC12 links.

To the argument that Cisco IOS is inherently easier or harder to configure
than GateD, I say: "Feh."  If you can get an IOS geek with 7+ years worth
of IOS-shaped tire tracks down their backside, then IOS will seem a lot more
powerful.  If all you can get is me, IOS will seem slippery and awkward and
confusing and gated.conf will seem like deliverance.  Anybody who cuts and
pastes config examples to demonstrate why one is "obviously clearer" is just
blowing smoke.  The rare element here is human expertise, not documentation
clarity or parser simplicity or any of the things geeks like to argue about.

In an overlooked comment of a few days ago, someone here mentioned that it
was generally easier to get someone with nonzero expertise to come help run
your network if you configured it via Cisco IOS rather than gated.conf.  And
this is true.  For now.  If someone else gets market share (which is usually
done via other means than technical merit, btw) then the other guy's config
syntax will start to get known by more folks.  Given that it is *definitely*
better to build a network that new hires can help you run, if that network
is expected to grow at all, Cisco IOS has a real edge right now.  I don't
consider Cisco terribly vulnerable since if they wanted to drop their prices
by half they'd still make a pile of money.  Not someone to compete against;
they can beat you coming or going.  That's why I so admire the folks who
*are* trying to beat Cisco in this game.  What chuzpah!  <clink>.