On Tuesday, July 13, 2010 12:31:25 pm Christian Chapman wrote:
> >> Sorry, it's software running those ASIC's and FPGA's, even at that level
> Sorry ..Its a clock that runs ASIC's and FPGA's
> HDL is simply used to describe functionality before synthesis tools 
> translate the design into real hardware (gates and wires)

I missed an 'on' in my sentence; should have read '...software running ON those 
ASIC's and FPGA's....'  My apologies for the error, which completely changed 
the meaning of my statement.  

A perusal of Cisco's own documentation for one of their 'hardware' forwarding 
engines, the PXF used in the 10k edge services router and others, shows that 
even with the Toaster ASIC (looking at a pair right now on an older PRE1 for 
uBR10K) and its associated memory, you have something running its own software 
doing the work.  Cisco's own documentation describes PXF in these words: "Each 
of the coprocessors in a PXF network processor is an independent, 
high-performance processor, customized for packet processing. Each processor, 
called an Express Micro Controller (XMC), provides a sophisticated 
dual-instruction-issue execution unit, with a variety of special instructions 
designed to execute packet-processing tasks efficiently."  

Instruction issue?  Execution unit?  Special instructions?  Sounds like a 
software-driven processor to me.  Specialized software instruction set, yes.  
True hardware forwarding, no software involvement?  No.  More like asymmetrical 
multiprocessing software routing.  Call it hardware accelerated if you like; 
PXF is to networking as a nVidia GeForce GPU is to graphics.

Now, if we're talking directed attacks at the control plane.... well, COPP 
exists for a reason in Cisco-land.  Tarpits and other techniques (too bad 
nVidia's ActiveArmor firewall inside their nForce chipset's NIC's is so 
broken), including transparent layer 2 stateful inspection firewalling (easily 
doable with Linux iptables and bridging), can do the same for a single-core 
router.  

Now to, as Emeril would say, kick it up a notch, you're going to have a very 
hard time DoS'ing twenty-four Phenom II cores (four sockets, six cores per 
socket), though (which will likely set you back less than a midrange Cisco 
router).  I could see Vyatta on 24 Phenom II cores having blistering and nearly 
DoS-proof performance, for about what accelerated forwarding platforms cost.  
When the developers of software forwarding engines figure out how to leverage 
vector processing (SSE and similar, as well as nVidia's CUDA) to do packet 
forwarding, we're going to see commodity OS network routing performance hit 
another level. 

But specialized network processors don't always guarantee the great scalability 
that can be obtained with the technique.  Catalyst 8540 anyone? (I have 
several, and use a few in production; great boxes for raw IPv4 routing, but not 
at the edge, although in theory they should have been DoS-proof, since they're 
already switching worst-case packet sizes on the shared memory fabric at wire 
speed; their control plane was their weakest link).

Dedicated network coprocessors can be a good thing, but they're still 
software-based (even in the Catalyst 8540's case).

Reply via email to