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

Re: Software router state of the art

  • From: Seth Mattinen
  • Date: Mon Jul 28 17:51:23 2008
Andrew D Kirch wrote:
Rev. Jeffrey Paul wrote:
On Mon, Jul 28, 2008 at 10:08:32PM +0100, [email protected] wrote:
But if you want free suggestions, then you'll have to put up with
half answers, vendor fanboys, and the usual ruckus of NANOG.


As much as I hate to contribute to the problem, I'd like to point out
that the barrage of useless, off-topic, empty traffic on this list in
the last week is, in my estimation, quite a bit above the "usual" ruckus
of NANOG.

While I'm not one to thunk down the rulebook, can you all collectively
knock it off?

Cheers,
-jp
I haven't followed the other threads in the last week, but I don't think that a discussion of routers is off topic. While Michael's opinion was expressed in a fairly tongue-in-cheek method as would be required by his response, I don't see anything offtopic, perhaps just hotly worded.


I wasn't too thrilled about being accused of OS politics when I was genuinely concerned about deploying a software router based on things I've heard in passing or read about here previously. It *is* nice to know that someone found out that FreeBSD 7 hates OSPF - since I actually use OSPF - and that would have tormented me for a while had I gone that route.

Back to the topic at hand, unfortunately I wouldn't have the luxury of converting T1/T3 to Ethernet. I've used cards from Digium and Sangoma in the past for T1 and been relatively pleased, although older Digium cards hated sharing an IRQ with anything.

~Seth