Contact at Ubiquiti Networks?
jgreco at ns.sol.net
Tue May 26 15:57:42 UTC 2020
On Tue, May 26, 2020 at 02:44:40PM +0000, Mel Beckman wrote:
> I empathize with your BGP problems. I???ve had problems with BGP
> on anything other than Cisco for my entire networking life. It???s
> just the nature of the beast, although that???s not an excuse for
> ubiquity not fixing it.
> But what is an excuse is market demand. How many people do you
> think speak BGP on ubiquiti routers? I know ubiquiti, like every
> company, likes to claim that they do everything. But no company
> can do everything, so you have to find out where their strengths
> are and avoid their weaknesses.
Well, my point was more about the nature of software (it's fixable!)
and the "market pressures deter edge case bux fixes" argument which
appears to be a fallacy if you, as a hardware vendor, have paid a
license for some professionally developed product, like ZebOS.
ZebOS is the commercial offspring of Zebra, which forked Quagga,
which forked FRR. I have minor complaints about all of them, but
the open source developers have generally done well over the years.
ZebOS is integrated into a variety of networking devices. A quick
Google suggests this includes F5, SonicWall, Ubiquiti, Fortinet,
and other devices.
Ubiquiti produced its EdgeRouter Lite back in late 2012, able to do
a million PPS on a $100 platform, so there's little doubt about
their ability to create devices that do "hardware assisted" software
packet routing. I was kinda hoping that the marriage of their
hardware and ZebOS would result in a usable product. I am pretty
sure that's what Ubiquiti expected to happen, so that they would not
need to worry about the finer points of arcane routing protocols.
I don't really have a need to do a bazillion PPS. There's still an
Ascend GRF 400 here, and having passed the 150K routes mark, it now
serves to lift my office laser printer to a better height. It's
also part of why I try to avoid buying the hardware routers. There's
no budget for it and hardware routers generally provide far more
router than is needed here.
> Personally, I always put a pair of stacked Cisco layer3 switches
> at the edge of every BGP network. This gives me reliable, redundant
> BGP peering that operates at wire speed and can still carry full
> backbone tables. Use Cisco hardware let me do this for less money
> then I would pay for a buggy ubiquiti router.
[assuming that was supposed to be "Used Cisco hardware"]
Veering way off topic here, I wasn't aware that there were layer 3
stackable Cisco switches that could handle full BGP tables. The
Ubiquiti Infinity is $1,800. I am curious what you're using. I
have nothing against used hardware.
Joe Greco - sol.net Network Services - Milwaukee, WI - http://www.sol.net
"The strain of anti-intellectualism has been a constant thread winding its way
through our political and cultural life, nurtured by the false notion that
democracy means that 'my ignorance is just as good as your knowledge.'"-Asimov
More information about the NANOG