North American Network Operators Group
Date Prev | Date Next | Date Index | Thread Index | Author Index | Historical

Re: too many routes

  • From: Paul Traina
  • Date: Wed Sep 10 10:51:11 1997 
  From: Vadim Antonov <[email protected]>
  Subject: RE: too many routes
  Joseph T. Klein  <[email protected]> wrote:
  
  >The routes issue historically comes down to the fact that Sprint did not
  >want to convert from Cisco 4000 to Ciscos that had larger memory capacity.
  
  Sprint never used cisco 4000s in the backbone.  Just FYI.
  
  Historically, memory limitation was because CSC/4 board in AGS/+
  routers had memory soldered in.  The box was absolute top of the line
  when it started to fall over.

Not to mention the obvious problem, the routing table was growing
exponentially.  I don't care how much memory you put in a box, if
we hadn't solved that problem, the game would have been over.
  
  >Memory is cheap these days ... the big boys just don't wish to have a
  >free market.
  
  This statement shows that the level of comprehension of the issues
  remains absymally low.
  
  It is NOT memory; it is CPU which is a limiting factor.  Even the
  mainframes would keel over on routing computations if the drastic
  measures weren't taken to aggregate and dampen.

Absolutely.