Vyatta as a BRAS

Dobbins, Roland rdobbins at arbor.net
Tue Jul 13 21:50:13 CDT 2010

On Jul 14, 2010, at 9:31 AM, Dan White wrote:

> has the appearance of you struggling to hold on to an idea that may have been more true in the past,

It's true today, and I'm not 'struggling to hold' onto anything.  Take any software-based router from Cisco or Juniper or whomever (if Juniper still make software-based routers, I don't know if they do or not), packet it until it falls over, then repeat the process with a properly-configured hardware-based router from the same manufacturer - you can demonstrate the validity of the proposition for yourself, as the hardware-based router can handle considerably more traffic, whereas the software-based router will pitch over as a result of a surprisingly small amount of traffic.

> and less true today, as is evident based on the input from other list participants.

Input based upon experience which is seemingly heavily weighted towards the lower end, rather than the higher end, of network speeds and routing platforms - and which doesn't seem to encompass much examination of the ability of said lower-end devices to maintain availability in the face of direct attack.

It can be quite interesting to take a packet-generator to a software-based router and see just how easy it is to make it fall over, and then repeat the experience with a hardware-based router, and consider the implications thereof, even at relatively low bandwidth/throughput.

Roland Dobbins <rdobbins at arbor.net> // <http://www.arbornetworks.com>

    Injustice is relatively easy to bear; what stings is justice.

                        -- H.L. Mencken

More information about the NANOG mailing list