|
North American Network Operators Group Date Prev | Date Next | Date Index | Thread Index | Author Index | Historical Re: Internet Backbone Index
On Sun, 13 Jul 1997, Dorian R. Kim wrote: > On Sun, 13 Jul 1997, Stephen Balbach wrote: > > > On Sun, 13 Jul 1997, Randy Bush wrote: > > > > > There is one significant difference between routed and switched backbones. > > > > Doesnt an IP Switch have lower latency and higher pps? > > What's an IP switch? If you can define what this is other than a marketing > stunt, I'd appreciate it. Routes the first packets and switches the rest based on "flows". It is not dependent on layer 2 or PVC's to determain the correct route? This is what Ive read from the mfg's who claim higher pps via this method then straight routing. I realize this is similair to the C vs C++ argument - C++ is a method more then a language, IP Switcing is more a routing technique then a new hardware technology. But is it worth it? > > Is a Cisco running NetFlow any faster then a routed Cisco? > > No. A cisco router running netflow switching doesn't make it a switch, just as > a cisco router running optimum switching doesn't make it a switch either. > > There can be large amounts of confusion that gets created because of marketing > silliness. > > All routers and switches forward traffic. When the forwarding decision is > made in layer 3, this is usually referred to as being "routed" and when > forwarding decision is made in layer 2, this is usually referred to as > being "switched". > > People also refer to hardware/interface/link layer level forwarding decisions > made in routers as "switching." > > Hence, "fast" switching, "optimum" switching, and "netflow" switching in cisco > term, which doesn't make a router a switch. > > Most routers have the capability of being switches, while most switches don't > have the capability of being routers. (routers by their function needs to talk > to layer 2, while switches do not necessarily have to) > > Since people seem to think that switch has some magically theraputic quality > to network performance I wonder why Bay marketing hasn't started making a big > deal about the fact that their BCNs function as frame relay switches. I assume at some level it makes sense to do switching for topology reasons. But for performance, it is not a benefit? .stb
|