[ppml] too many variables

vijay gill vgill at vijaygill.com
Fri Aug 10 18:36:07 UTC 2007

On 8/10/07, Paul Vixie <paul at vix.com> wrote:
> [ vijay]
> > I guess people are still spectacularly missing the real point.   The
> point
> > isn't that  the latest generation hardware cpu du jour you can pick up
> from
> > the local hardware store is doubling processing power every n months.
> agreed.
> > The point is that getting them qualified, tested, verified, and then
> > deployed is a non trivial task. We need to be substantially behind
> moores
> > observation to be economically viable. I have some small number of route
> > processors in my network and it is a major hassle to get even those few
> > upgraded. In other words, if you have a network that you can upgrade the
> RPs
> > on every 18 months, let me know.
> yow.  while i agree that routing processors cannot, and have historically
> not
> had to, track moore's law, i am still surprised to see such a heavy focus
> on
> the RP.  my (ample) gut feeling on this is that system level
> (combinatorial)
> effects would limit Internet routing long before moore's law could do so.

It is an easy derivative/proxy for the system level effect is all. Bandwidth
for updates (inter and intra system) are another choking point but folks
tend to be even less aware of those than cpu.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mailman.nanog.org/pipermail/nanog/attachments/20070810/1f9bbf90/attachment.html>

More information about the NANOG mailing list