North American Network Operators Group Date Prev | Date Next | Date Index | Thread Index | Author Index | Historical Re: image stream routers
On 17/09/05, Lincoln Dale <[email protected]> wrote: > > Christopher J. Wolff wrote: > > I'd be interested to know the relative pros and cons of switching packets in > > software (Imagestream) versus handing them off to a dedicated ASIC (Cisco, > > Juniper) > > [without having looked at Imagestream in any way, shape or form..] > > it would be _unlikely_ that any router vendor that wants to support >OC3 > could do so with the 'standard' (non-modified) linux IP stack. if they > are modifying the 'standard' linux IP stack then its very unlikely that > one could do so without having to publish the source-code to it. (i.e. > as per GPL). > > 'standard' linux on standard hardware isn't capable of much more than > 100K PPS. sure - some folks have a few hundred packets/sec - but these > are minimalist versus the demonstrated performance of ASIC-based > forwarding, typically 30M-50M PPS. > Regarding software based forwarding and pps old docs from the FreeBSD guys claim that the 1Mpps barrier can be broken on a 2.8GHz XEON, with todays standards a mediocer pc. http://people.freebsd.org/~andre/FreeBSD-5.3-Networking.pdf A collegue smartbits tested a 1GHz pc, with a full feed and 250k simoultaneons flows it managed around 250kpps. This also with freebsd and device polling. It sounds to me like a software based machine can be plenty fast with good code under the hood. /Tony -- Tony Sarendal - [email protected] IP/Unix -= The scorpion replied, "I couldn't help it, it's my nature" =-
|