North American Network Operators Group

Date Prev | Date Next | Date Index | Thread Index | Author Index | Historical

Re: Zebra/linux device production networking?

  • From: Joel Krauska
  • Date: Tue Jun 06 19:49:47 2006
  • Domainkey-signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=beta;; h=received:message-id:date:from:to:subject:cc:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition:references; b=NdaAd6T83TB6M1UkPJd1GPzkZX67ef8PEg1+JgDR+VKUWsfufr6UDvByE365pf1AYqnmwdRilbgeptRYUiUaex8l5Mw4TFrMo8TNAt4JH6DDvfDbwBy8+ZpJpfjCTBR6o51NgqQtxRINduqyWRyiGc5gMmoVAIV1gBiDTB14Vow=

(resent after getting on nanog-post)

On 6/6/06, Nick Burke <[email protected]> wrote:
How many of you have actually use(d) Zebra/Linux as a routing device
(core and/or regional, I'd be interested in both) in a production (read:
99.999% required, hsrp, bgp, dot1q, other goodies) environment?
I work for a company putting together an open source router platform.

We have a linux distro that is built off of XORP, but has plenty of
enhancements that make it more friendly for a typical router jockey.

It has dot1q support, bgp, ospf, rip, vrrp and many other goodies.
We're currently going through UNH testing of protocol conformance.

We are always looking for folks to test the software out and see how it
suits their needs. (or not)

1. Keep in mind that current sever hardware won't push line
rate GigE at 64-bytes, but I find it quite reasonable as a candidate
for the access layer. (t1/t3 and possibly oc3 termination)  So don't
expect it to perform to the same level as dedicated hardware
solutions.  A few hundred Mbps of inet traffic (not 64 byte frames) is

2. Keep in mind that cheap PC hardware will result in bad MTBF.
Your PC router hardware should be quality gear with redundancy if you
can't tolerate any downtime.

We believe there's a place for open source routing platforms, but
it'll take some testing from the router community to solidify and
verify the stacks.

Want to help?