On 8/10/07, Leo Bicknell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > In a message written on Fri, Aug 10, 2007 at 11:08:26AM -0700, vijay gill > wrote: > > substantially behind moores observation to be economically viable. I > > have some small number of route processors in my network and it is a > > major hassle to get even those few upgraded. In other words, if you > > have a network that you can upgrade the RPs on every 18 months, let > me > > You're mixing problems. > > Even though you may only be able to put in a new route processor > every 3-5 years doesn't mean the vendor shouldn't have a faster > version every 18 months, or even sooner. It's the addition of the > two that's the problem. You're 5 year cycle may come a year before > the vendors 5 year cycle, putting you on 9 year old gear before you > refresh next.
The vendor has to qualify, write code for, and support n versions. This IS a part of the problem. Just blindly swapping out CPUs is non trivial, as any systems engineer can tell you. The support cost will be passed on to the consumer. /vijay Vendor J got it half right. The RP is a separately replaceable > component based on a commodity motherboard, hooked in with commodity > ethernet, using the most popular CPU and ram on the market. And > yes, I understand needing to pay extra for the sheet metal, cooling > calculations, and other items. > > But, they still cost 10x a PC based on the same components, and are > upgraded perhaps every 3 years, at best. They don't even take > advantage of perhaps going from a 2.0Ghz processor to a 2.4, using > the same motherboard, RAM, disk, etc. > > But I think the point still stands, I bet Vendor J in particular > could pop out a Core 2 Duo based RP with 8 gig of ram and a 300+ > gig hard drive in under 6 months while holding the price point if > BGP convergence demanded it, and their customers made it a priority. > > To Bill's original e-mail. Can we count on 2x every 18 months going > forward? No. But betting on 2x every 24 months, and accounting for the > delta between currently shipping and currently available hardware seems > completely reasonable when assessing the real problem. > > -- > Leo Bicknell - [EMAIL PROTECTED] - CCIE 3440 > PGP keys at http://www.ufp.org/~bicknell/ > Read TMBG List - [EMAIL PROTECTED], www.tmbg.org > > _______________________________________________ > PPML > You are receiving this message because you are subscribed to the ARIN > Public Policy > Mailing List ([EMAIL PROTECTED]). > Unsubscribe or manage your mailing list subscription at: > http://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/ppml Please contact the ARIN Member > Services > Help Desk at [EMAIL PROTECTED] if you experience any issues. > > >
