Linux Router KIT

Sun Nov 1 22:00:03 UTC 1998

> *shit. You have no clues. Linux was better at networking than BSD
> even in 1.2.x days ... 

IIRC Linux didn't have VLSM in the 1.2.x tree, I seem to remember hacking
GateD for ages to make it  work at University only to find it wasn't
GateD that was broken. The code for Linux hadn't been written. I
then moved to work with NetBSD. 

In my opinion, and I've been using PC's and Sparcs to route 
for over 4 years now, all the Unices have their pros and cons, I use
alot of NetBSD at home, but I use BSD/OS at work because of the support.
I did use NetBSD with a ATM interface and BGP4 a while back and it
did actually work although I doubt it could have driven 155M.

There is a limit however that one hits when you really need
hardware that is dedicated to routing. I recently have spent alot
of time with several different vendors and to be honest all the vendors
have their problems. The trick is to identify which one can deal with
them the quickest, and there are some that need to wake up in a big way.

followups to comp.os.*.advocacy 

Regards,
Neil.

> 
> All the limitations of the Linux/PC router are due to the PC hardware
> architecture. As seen on the list, people put 8 cards in the same
> PC. This exceeds the bus speed of a PC. Even a single 100Mbps NIC
> kills the PCI bus in most PCs should it run full speed. Also, you have
> to be very carefull with the NIC you choose.
> 
> PCs simply were not built for forwarding packets and fast I/O.
> 
> Of course a Linux/PC will never beat a cisco :-) but the cost is
> sometimes an order of magnitude lower for roughly the same
> performance.
> 
> -- 
> Matei CONOVICI, cmatei at roedu.net
> 

-- 
Neil J. McRae. Alive and Kicking.       Domino: In the glow of the night.
neil at DOMINO.ORG        NetBSD/sparc: 100% SpF (Solaris protection Factor) 
  Free the daemon in your <A HREF="http://www.NetBSD.ORG/">computer!</A>