Re: Vyatta as a BRAS

On Monday, July 19, 2010 05:40:07 pm Akyol, Bora A wrote: > Except that the goal you set below is very very hard to do on a software > router unless its CPU has packet classification properties implemented in HW. And then there are Systems on a Chip (SoC) like the Realtek 8650 that really take i

Re: Vyatta as a BRAS

> From: Mark Smith > [mailto:na...@85d5b20a518b8f6864949bd940457dc124746ddc.nosense.org] > Sent: Monday, July 19, 2010 2:39 AM > To: Tim Durack > Cc: NANOG list > Subject: Re: Vyatta as a BRAS > And that's the crux of the issue. Can the box survive if line rate > maximum PPS is being ai

RE: Vyatta as a BRAS

proper hardware assist. Bora -Original Message- From: Mark Smith [mailto:na...@85d5b20a518b8f6864949bd940457dc124746ddc.nosense.org] Sent: Monday, July 19, 2010 2:39 AM To: Tim Durack Cc: NANOG list Subject: Re: Vyatta as a BRAS And that's the crux of the issue. Can the box survi

Re: Vyatta as a BRAS

On Sun, 18 Jul 2010 21:07:36 -0400 Tim Durack wrote: > On Sun, Jul 18, 2010 at 8:01 PM, Brett Frankenberger > wrote: > > On Mon, Jul 19, 2010 at 07:13:46AM +0930, Mark Smith wrote: > >> > >> This document supports that. If the definition of a software router is > >> one that doesn't have a fixed

Re: Vyatta as a BRAS

On Sun, Jul 18, 2010 at 8:01 PM, Brett Frankenberger wrote: > On Mon, Jul 19, 2010 at 07:13:46AM +0930, Mark Smith wrote: >> >> This document supports that. If the definition of a software router is >> one that doesn't have a fixed at the factory forwarding function, then >> the ASR1K is one. > >

Re: Vyatta as a BRAS

On Mon, Jul 19, 2010 at 07:13:46AM +0930, Mark Smith wrote: > > This document supports that. If the definition of a software router is > one that doesn't have a fixed at the factory forwarding function, then > the ASR1K is one. The code running in the ASICs on line cards in 6500-series chassis is

Re: Vyatta as a BRAS

On Jul 19, 2010, at 5:43 AM, Mark Smith wrote: > This document supports that. No, it doesn't. Specialized NPUs, TCAMs present in ASR1K. CRS-3 has specialized NPUs, ASICs, as well. Enough on this topic - it's obvious that both ASR1K and CRS-3 are hardware-based platforms. ---

Re: Vyatta as a BRAS

On Sun, 18 Jul 2010 18:12:29 +0100 Nick Hilliard wrote: > On 18 Jul 2010, at 10:58, "Dobbins, Roland" wrote: > > ASR1K, which is what I'm assuming you're referring to, is a hardware-based > > router. Same for ASR9K. > > My c* SE swears that the asr1k is a "software router". I didn't push him

Re: Vyatta as a BRAS

On Jul 19, 2010, at 1:12 AM, Nick Hilliard wrote: > My c* SE swears that the asr1k is a "software router". I didn't push him on > it's architecture though. Specialized multicore NPU + TCAM = hardware. --- Roland Dobbins //

Re: Vyatta as a BRAS

On Jul 19, 2010, at 1:55 AM, Brett Frankenberger wrote: > So where do you draw the line? Is the ASR hardware forwarding? Yes - specialized muticore NPU plus TCAM. --- Roland Dobbins // In

Re: Vyatta as a BRAS

On Sun, Jul 18, 2010 at 06:12:29PM +0100, Nick Hilliard wrote: > On 18 Jul 2010, at 10:58, "Dobbins, Roland" wrote: > > ASR1K, which is what I'm assuming you're referring to, is a > > hardware-based router. Same for ASR9K. > > My c* SE swears that the asr1k is a "software router". I didn't push

Re: Vyatta as a BRAS

On 18 Jul 2010, at 10:58, "Dobbins, Roland" wrote: > ASR1K, which is what I'm assuming you're referring to, is a hardware-based > router. Same for ASR9K. My c* SE swears that the asr1k is a "software router". I didn't push him on it's architecture though. The asr9k is an npu based device -

Re: Vyatta as a BRAS

On Jul 18, 2010, at 9:47 AM, Mark Smith wrote: > Since specific routers have been mentioned, care to comment on the Cisco ASR? ASR1K, which is what I'm assuming you're referring to, is a hardware-based router. Same for ASR9K. -

Re: Vyatta as a BRAS

On Wed, 14 Jul 2010 14:12:07 + "Dobbins, Roland" wrote: > > On Jul 14, 2010, at 8:48 PM, Florian Weimer wrote: > > > From or to your customers? > > Both. > > > Stopping customer-sourced attacks is probably a good thing for the Internet > > at learge. > > Concur 100%. > > > And you can

Re: Vyatta as a BRAS

On 7/16/10 6:02 AM, valdis.kletni...@vt.edu wrote: On Thu, 15 Jul 2010 20:57:15 PDT, Henry Linneweh said: Can we get a consensus definition on these definition's and what hardware vender's make edge routers and what hardware vender's make core routers. I got a router, it's got 5-6 10GE interfa

Re: Vyatta as a BRAS

On Jul 16, 2010, at 6:02 AM, valdis.kletni...@vt.edu wrote: > 1/4" plastic tubing - > http://www.waterfiltermart.com/images/products/preview/plastic_tubing_and_nut.jpg > garden hose - > http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/c/cd/Garden_hose.jpg/800px-Garden_hose.jpg > fire hose -

Re: Vyatta as a BRAS

On Thursday, July 15, 2010 02:24:06 pm Łukasz Bromirski wrote: > (and I'm all for FreeBSD boxes, don't get me wrong, the whole point > of this discussion is that either you're doing hardware forwarding > and you're pretty safe [unfortunately often with a lot of caveats, > but still], or you'r

Re: Vyatta as a BRAS

> I got a router, it's got 5-6 10GE interfaces talking to other routers on > my network backbone, and a bunch of 10GE links to end-user-facing aggregation > switches. Since it's only forwarding inside my network, it's a core router > by your definition. > > I now turn up an identical hardware 10GE

Re: Vyatta as a BRAS

On Thu, 15 Jul 2010 20:57:15 PDT, Henry Linneweh said: Your definitions seem to be rather ATM-specific, which may be a bit of a problem in a world dominated by Ethernet... > Can we get a consensus definition on these definition's and what hardware > vender's make edge routers and what hardware v

Re: Vyatta as a BRAS

PM Subject: Re: Vyatta as a BRAS On Thu, Jul 15, 2010 at 1:22 PM, Dennis Burgess wrote: > RouterOS is a software based router, we have them all over the world as > CORE and EDGE routers to networks. You keep using that word ("CORE"). I do not think it means what you think it means. Drive Slow, DoS Slower, Paul Wall

Re: Vyatta as a BRAS

I have that same problem with vendors that insist that there is a core vs customer vs peering edge set in networks. If a customer has 10g to a specific peer why should one not place them on the same device, ASIC, linecard, usw Core today means something that is 200g+/slot capable IMHO. Anyth

Re: Vyatta as a BRAS

On Thu, Jul 15, 2010 at 1:22 PM, Dennis Burgess wrote: > RouterOS is a software based router, we have them all over the world as > CORE and EDGE routers to networks. You keep using that word ("CORE"). I do not think it means what you think it means. Drive Slow, DoS Slower, Paul Wall

Re: Vyatta as a BRAS

On 2010-07-15 19:22, Dennis Burgess wrote: RouterOS is a software based router, we have them all over the world as CORE and EDGE routers to networks. Wonderful, congratulations. > Some of our hardware can hit multi-gig speeds, BGP etc. Same can do your competitors. We commonly replace 7206V

RE: Vyatta as a BRAS

Mikrotik Training - Author of "Learn RouterOS" -Original Message- From: Joe Greco [mailto:jgr...@ns.sol.net] Sent: Wednesday, July 14, 2010 10:18 AM To: Dobbins, Roland Cc: NANOG list Subject: Re: Vyatta as a BRAS > On Jul 14, 2010, at 5:45 AM, Joe Greco wrote: > &

Re: A question for the house and the moderators (was Re: Vyatta as a BRAS)

On Jul 15, 2010, at 11:43 PM, Larry Sheldon wrote: > A democracy is two wolves and a lamb voting on what to have for dinner. Under the assumption that I'm meant to be fulfilling the role of the lamb, I know when I'm outvoted, heh. This topic is obviously past its shelf-life. ;>

A question for the house and the moderators (was Re: Vyatta as a BRAS)

Oops--itch trigger finger [a round of the on-going and growing tedious micturation tournament] Is this squalling fest really more "operational" than a conversation dealing with a disabling spam attack? Really? -- Somebody should have said: A democracy is two wolves and a lamb voting on wh

A question for the house and the moderators (was Re: Vyatta as a BRAS)

On 7/15/2010 11:39, Dobbins, Roland wrote: > > On Jul 15, 2010, at 11:33 PM, Joe Greco wrote: > >> Provided with a counterexample where this isn't true, you simply ignore it. > > > I've yet to see a counterexample involving a software-based edge router in a > realistic testbed environment bein

Re: Vyatta as a BRAS

On Jul 15, 2010, at 11:33 PM, Joe Greco wrote: > Provided with a counterexample where this isn't true, you simply ignore it. I've yet to see a counterexample involving a software-based edge router in a realistic testbed environment being deliberately packeted in order to cause an availability

Re: Vyatta as a BRAS

> On Jul 15, 2010, at 10:23 PM, Joe Greco wrote: > > For example, for a provider whose entire upstream capacity is 1Gbps, I ha= > ve a hard time seeing how a Linux- or FreeBSD-based box could credibly be c= > laimed not to be a suitable edge router. > > Because it can and will be whacked quite eas

Re: Vyatta as a BRAS

On Jul 15, 2010, at 11:01 PM, Cian Brennan wrote: > I'm almost certain they're not the uses that Roland is saying that software > routers are entirely unsuited for. Correct - I'm talking about SP (and even enterprise) edge routers. I've seen as little as a few hundred kpps totally hose Cisco 7

Re: Vyatta as a BRAS

On Thu, Jul 15, 2010 at 11:54:39AM -0400, Bill Bogstad wrote: > On Thu, Jul 15, 2010 at 11:35 AM, Dobbins, Roland wrote: > > > > On Jul 15, 2010, at 10:23 PM, Joe Greco wrote: > > > >> For example, for a provider whose entire upstream capacity is 1Gbps, I > >> have a hard time seeing how a Linux-

Re: Vyatta as a BRAS

On Thu, Jul 15, 2010 at 11:35 AM, Dobbins, Roland wrote: > > On Jul 15, 2010, at 10:23 PM, Joe Greco wrote: > >> For example, for a provider whose entire upstream capacity is 1Gbps, I have >> a hard time seeing how a Linux- or FreeBSD-based box could credibly be >> claimed not to be a suitable e

Re: Vyatta as a BRAS

On Jul 15, 2010, at 10:23 PM, Joe Greco wrote: > For example, for a provider whose entire upstream capacity is 1Gbps, I have a > hard time seeing how a Linux- or FreeBSD-based box could credibly be claimed > not to be a suitable edge router. Because it can and will be whacked quite easily by a

Re: Vyatta as a BRAS

> I briefly browsed the links and I didn't see any traffic profiles included. > > If you are talking about pushing x mbps with no specifics and/or general > traffic, I think most of us agree you can do that easily and probably > consistently without any issues. And for some icing, you may even

Re: Vyatta as a BRAS

- Original Message - From: "Joe Greco" To: "Dobbins, Roland" Cc: "NANOG list" Sent: Wednesday, July 14, 2010 7:03 PM Subject: Re: Vyatta as a BRAS On Jul 14, 2010, at 10:17 PM, Joe Greco wrote: > The truth is that you can keep throwing CPU at a p

Re: Vyatta as a BRAS

> On Jul 14, 2010, at 10:17 PM, Joe Greco wrote: > > > The truth is that you can keep throwing CPU at a problem as well. I can = > size a software based router such that it can remain available. > > Not against mpps, or even high kpps, you can't, unfortunately. Really? I'm positive that I can,

Re: Vyatta as a BRAS

On 7/13/10 11:11 AM, Dobbins, Roland wrote: On Jul 14, 2010, at 1:02 AM, Matthew Kaufman wrote: Dangerous in places where forwarding table exceeds hardware cache limits. (See Code Red worm stories) During the Code Red/Nimda period (2001), and on into the Slammer/Blaster/Nachi period (2003),

Re: Vyatta as a BRAS

> Is the CRS-1 hardware or software? > Lots of custom hardware in there - but lots of processing cores that look > suspiciously like software engines too. It might well be software engines in there, but that's not the point here. The linecards (MSC/PLIM etc.) in a CRS is designed to handle wirerat

Re: Vyatta as a BRAS

On Jul 15, 2010, at 1:49 AM, Lamar Owen wrote: > CEF is CEF is CEF, whether done on a 2600 or a 7200 or a GSR. Now, don't get > me wrong; the engineers who make massively parallel forwarding engines are > creative and smart folks, and have come up with very elegant methods of > moving the bit

Re: Vyatta as a BRAS

> > I wasn't aware that the 7206 and M20 classified as software-based. > > I don't see why you could call it anything but a software router. The 7206 yes. The M20, no. Steinar Haug, Nethelp consulting, sth...@nethelp.no

Re: Vyatta as a BRAS

> Regardless of recommendations, people are using commodity server-grade SMP > hardware to run commodity OS's to get the job done, and given the people who > have chimed in here, apparently are doing it without lots of problems. The > increase on this and other lists of questions about Mikrotik

Re: Vyatta as a BRAS

On Tue, 13 Jul 2010 valdis.kletni...@vt.edu wrote: I wasn't aware that the 7206 and M20 classified as software-based. I don't see why you could call it anything but a software router. That's sort of why things like it and the 7500 before it lasted so long. As the thing ages, cisco comes ou

Re: Vyatta as a BRAS

On Wednesday, July 14, 2010 08:39:50 am Dobbins, Roland wrote: > And it's not *my* definition - 'hardware-based' vs. 'software-based' are the > terms to describe these two fundamental architectural classes of router > *within Cisco itself*. [snip] > There's a world of difference in packet-handl

Re: Vyatta as a BRAS

On Jul 14, 2010, at 10:17 PM, Joe Greco wrote: > The truth is that you can keep throwing CPU at a problem as well. I can size > a software based router such that it can remain available. Not against mpps, or even high kpps, you can't, unfortunately. > Software based platforms have an incredib

Re: Vyatta as a BRAS

> On Jul 14, 2010, at 5:45 AM, Joe Greco wrote: > > That's just a completely ignorant statement to make. > > It's based on a great deal of real-world experience; I'm sorry you consider= > that to be 'ignorant'. You're speaking to someone who has extensive experience with "software" based routers

Re: Vyatta as a BRAS

On Jul 14, 2010, at 8:59 PM, Florian Weimer wrote: > There might be contractual reasons not to enable that feature. 8-/ Ignoring is generally pretty harmless; dropping can break traceroute, RSVP, et. al. Conversely, there are also generally pretty strong contractual reasons not to have one's

Re: Vyatta as a BRAS

* Roland Dobbins: > On Jul 14, 2010, at 8:38 PM, Florian Weimer wrote: > >> There's also the question of IP options (or extension headers). 8-) > > I know that some modern hardware-based routers have the ability to > either ignore options, or to drop option packets altogether. There might be cont

Re: Vyatta as a BRAS

On Jul 14, 2010, at 8:48 PM, Florian Weimer wrote: > From or to your customers? Both. > Stopping customer-sourced attacks is probably a good thing for the Internet > at learge. Concur 100%. > And you can't combat attacks targeted at customers within your own network > unless you've got ver

Re: Vyatta as a BRAS

* Roland Dobbins: > That's what I meant - even a very small botnet can easily overwhelm > software-based edge routers. >From or to your customers? Stopping customer-sourced attacks is probably a good thing for the Internet at learge. And you can't combat attacks targeted at customers within you

Re: Vyatta as a BRAS

On Jul 14, 2010, at 8:38 PM, Florian Weimer wrote: > There's also the question of IP options (or extension headers). 8-) I know that some modern hardware-based routers have the ability to either ignore options, or to drop option packets altogether. I believe the same is now true of IPv6 extens

Re: Vyatta as a BRAS

* Valdis Kletnieks: > (cue weasel-words about those routers using ASICs for most forwarding, but > doing multicast forwarding in software in 5.. 4.. 3..) There's also the question of IP options (or extension headers). 8-) -- Florian Weimer BFK edv-consulting GmbH http://ww

Re: Vyatta as a BRAS

On Jul 14, 2010, at 7:01 PM, wrote: > But as others have stated, the 7206 has at least some hardware acceleration, Unfortunately, said statements are factually incorrect. 7200s have no hardware acceleration of any type whatsoever. from

Re: Vyatta as a BRAS

On Wed, 14 Jul 2010 02:18:18 -, "Dobbins, Roland" said: > Right. And to date, such routers make use of ASICs - i.e., 'hardware-based' > routers, in the vernacular. > > Routers which use only centralized, general-purpose processors can't handle > even a fraction of 'line-rate' without tanking

Re: Vyatta as a BRAS

On Jul 14, 2010, at 1:34 PM, Mikael Abrahamsson wrote: > CRS-1 uses multicore processors (hundreds of cores) for forwarding on their > linecards, and they achieve 40+ Mpps per linecard. The CRS-1 makes use of the Metro subsystem for forwarding, with multiple Metros per Modular Service Card (

Re: Vyatta as a BRAS

On Tue, 13 Jul 2010, Lamar Owen wrote: 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

Re: Vyatta as a BRAS

On Jul 14, 2010, at 9:31 AM, Dan White wrote: > has the appearance of you struggling to hold on to an idea that may have been > more true in the past, It's true today, and I'm not 'struggling to hold' onto anything. Take any software-based router from Cisco or Juniper or whomever (if Juniper

Re: Vyatta as a BRAS

On Jul 14, 2010, at 5:45 AM, Joe Greco wrote: > That's just a completely ignorant statement to make. It's based on a great deal of real-world experience; I'm sorry you consider that to be 'ignorant'. > I notice in particular how carefully you qualify that with "[w]hen BCPs are > followed"; t

Re: Vyatta as a BRAS

On 14/07/10 02:18 +, Dobbins, Roland wrote: On Jul 14, 2010, at 3:26 AM, Tony Li wrote: The whole point about being DoS resistant is one of horsepower. To do DoS protection correctly, you need to be able to do packet examination at line rate. Right. And to date, such routers make use o

Re: Vyatta as a BRAS

On Jul 14, 2010, at 4:03 AM, wrote: > I wasn't aware that the 7206 and M20 classified as software-based. 7200 certainly is - I'm not familiar with the minutiae of Juniper boxes, but I believe the M20 is hardware-based. In the classic report you cite, the issue with the M20 occurred due to la

Re: Vyatta as a BRAS

On Jul 14, 2010, at 3:26 AM, Tony Li wrote: > The whole point about being DoS resistant is one of horsepower. To do DoS > protection correctly, you need to be able to do packet examination at line > rate. Right. And to date, such routers make use of ASICs - i.e., 'hardware-based' routers, i

Re: Vyatta as a BRAS

> On Jul 13, 2010, at 10:58 PM, Joe Greco wrote: > > It's interesting. One can get equally militant and say that hardware bas= > ed routers are irrelevant in many applications.=20 > > When BCPs are followed, they don't tend to fall over the moment someone hit= > s them with a few kpps of packets

Re: Vyatta as a BRAS

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 hard

Re: Vyatta as a BRAS

010 10:08:30 AM Subject: Re: Vyatta as a BRAS On 7/13/10 10:56 AM, Dobbins, Roland wrote: > > On Jul 14, 2010, at 12:39 AM, > wrote: > >> I haven't done real world testing with Vyatta but we consistently >> pass 750KPPS+ without the slightest hiccup on our FreeBSD ro

Re: Vyatta as a BRAS

On 7/13/10 10:56 AM, Dobbins, Roland wrote: > > On Jul 14, 2010, at 12:39 AM, > wrote: > >> I haven't done real world testing with Vyatta but we consistently >> pass 750KPPS+ without the slightest hiccup on our FreeBSD routing >> systems. > > 750kpps packeting the box itself? > > Also, note t

Re: Vyatta as a BRAS

--- On Tue, 7/13/10, valdis.kletni...@vt.edu wrote: > I wasn't aware that the 7206 and M20 classified as > software-based. > No weasel words necessary. I won't speak for the M20, but I've always thought of the 7206 as a software-routing platform - it's a pretty good swiss-army-knife software

Re: Vyatta as a BRAS

On Tuesday, July 13, 2010 03:02:21 pm khatfi...@socllc.net wrote: > In that case you are entirely accurate. If you were to use Vyatta > (linux-based) systems for this then you would likely need additional > infrastructure to firewall or zone it to ensure it can't be hit directly. Much like COPP

Re: Vyatta as a BRAS

On Tue, 13 Jul 2010 18:11:45 -, "Dobbins, Roland" said: > During the Code Red/Nimda period (2001), and on into the Slammer/Blaster/Nachi > period (2003), all the routers I personally know of which were adversely > affected were software-based, didn't make use of ASICs for forwarding. Cisco 72

Re: Vyatta as a BRAS

Hi folks, On Jul 13, 2010, at 12:05 PM, Nick Hilliard wrote: > I think Roland's point was that on "hardware routers", there is a > separation of function between the control and the forwarding planes, and > that the forwarding plane is designed to be able to transmit data in an > efficient paral

Re: Vyatta as a BRAS

On 13/07/2010 16:07, Curtis Maurand wrote: > On 7/13/2010 4:53 AM, Dobbins, Roland wrote: >> When a single botted/misbehaving host easily can take down a >> software-based BRAS, that's a pretty strong indication that >> software-based edge devices are contraindicated, heh. >> >> Software-based edge

Re: Vyatta as a BRAS

alled off locally but you're right it wouldn't withstand like 'hardware-accelerated' as stated before. Sorry for the confusion :) --Original Message-- From: Dobbins, Roland To: NANOG list Subject: Re: Vyatta as a BRAS Sent: Jul 13, 2010 1:37 PM On Jul 14, 2010, at 1:

Re: Vyatta as a BRAS

On Jul 14, 2010, at 1:29 AM, wrote: > We were talking about routing though. I was talking about packeting the boxes directly, apologies for being unclear - that's what I meant when I said that the era of software-based edge boxes is long past.

Re: Vyatta as a BRAS

he box directly and getting past the firewall, yes it would be substantially lower. We were talking about routing though. --Original Message-- From: Dobbins, Roland To: NANOG list Subject: Re: Vyatta as a BRAS Sent: Jul 13, 2010 12:56 PM On Jul 14, 2010, at 12:39 AM, wrote: > I

Re: Vyatta as a BRAS

On Jul 14, 2010, at 1:02 AM, Matthew Kaufman wrote: > Dangerous in places where forwarding table > exceeds hardware cache limits. (See Code Red worm stories) During the Code Red/Nimda period (2001), and on into the Slammer/Blaster/Nachi period (2003), all the routers I personally know of whic

Re: Vyatta as a BRAS

Joe Greco wrote: This isn't a new issue. Quite frankly, software routers have some very great strengths, and also some large weaknesses. Advocates of hardware based solutions frequently gloss over their own weaknesses. Let's talk plainly here. I'm not going to touch on things like Cisco's so

Re: Vyatta as a BRAS

On Jul 14, 2010, at 12:31 AM, Scott Weeks wrote: > I'm guessing "a few kpps of packets" is tounge-in-cheek? Entry level script > kiddies can get to a few hundred kpps easily. That's what I meant - even a very small botnet can easily overwhelm software-based edge routers. ---

Re: Vyatta as a BRAS

On Jul 14, 2010, at 12:39 AM, wrote: > I haven't done real world testing with Vyatta but we consistently pass > 750KPPS+ without the slightest hiccup on our FreeBSD routing systems. 750kpps packeting the box itself? Also, note that kpps is a small amount of traffic, compared to what even ve

Re: Vyatta as a BRAS

ue, 13 Jul 2010 16:15:18 To: NANOG list Subject: Re: Vyatta as a BRAS On Jul 13, 2010, at 10:58 PM, Joe Greco wrote: > It's interesting. One can get equally militant and say that hardware based > routers are irrelevant in many applications. When BCPs are followed, they don'

Re: Vyatta as a BRAS

--- rdobb...@arbor.net wrote: When BCPs are followed, they don't tend to fall over the moment someone hits them with a few kpps of packets - which should be a key criteria for an edge device. --- I'm guessing "a few kpps of packets" is toung

Re: Vyatta as a BRAS

On Tue, 13 Jul 2010 23:31:25 +0700, Christian Chapman said: > >> 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 And how many clockless CPU's have we seen so far? pgpZRV93nKbv1.pgp Description: PGP signature

Re: Vyatta as a BRAS

ssage - From: "Lamar Owen" To: Sent: Tuesday, July 13, 2010 10:25 PM Subject: Re: Vyatta as a BRAS On Tuesday, July 13, 2010 11:11:57 am Greg Whynott wrote: > They are all software based, no matter who builds them. Cisco IOS, > Juniper JunOS, etc. controlling hardwar

Re: Vyatta as a BRAS

On Jul 13, 2010, at 10:58 PM, Joe Greco wrote: > It's interesting. One can get equally militant and say that hardware based > routers are irrelevant in many applications. When BCPs are followed, they don't tend to fall over the moment someone hits them with a few kpps of packets - which sho

Re: Vyatta as a BRAS

> >> My comment would be that a software-based BRAS - 7200, Vyatta, et. > >> al. - is no longer viable in today's Internet, and hasn't been for > >> years, due to security/availability concerns. Same for peering/ > >> transit edge, customer aggregation edge, et. al. > > > > A low cost 7200 or

Re: Vyatta as a BRAS

On Tuesday, July 13, 2010 04:53:55 am Dobbins, Roland wrote: > When a single botted/misbehaving host easily can take down a software-based > BRAS, that's a pretty strong indication that software-based edge devices are > contraindicated, heh. I'm assuming you have data on that assertion, right?

Re: Vyatta as a BRAS

On 7/13/2010 11:11 AM, Greg Whynott wrote: They are all software based, no matter who builds them. Cisco IOS, Juniper JunOS, etc. controlling hardware asic's and fpga's. In a PIX, its a Pentium 4. I've also been in other routers that use PowerPC. It depends on the manufactu

Re: Vyatta as a BRAS

On Tuesday, July 13, 2010 11:11:57 am Greg Whynott wrote: > > They are all software based, no matter who builds them. Cisco IOS, > > Juniper JunOS, etc. > > controlling hardware asic's and fpga's. That run low level software microcode and bitstreams. Sorry, it's software running those ASIC'

Re: Vyatta as a BRAS

On Jul 13, 2010, at 11:11 AM, Greg Whynott wrote: >>> >> >> They are all software based, no matter who builds them. Cisco IOS, >> Juniper JunOS, etc. > > controlling hardware asic's and fpga's. Which are in essence software burned into chips. They can provide some acceleration, but will

Re: Vyatta as a BRAS

>> > > They are all software based, no matter who builds them. Cisco IOS, > Juniper JunOS, etc. controlling hardware asic's and fpga's. -g

Re: Vyatta as a BRAS

On 7/13/2010 4:53 AM, Dobbins, Roland wrote: On Jul 13, 2010, at 3:00 PM, wrote: I agree software-based deployments have their flaws but I do not agree that it cannot be managed securely with comparable or exceeding uptime -vs- a drop in appliance. I firmly believe it has it's place in '

Re: Vyatta as a BRAS

On 7/13/2010 2:56 AM, Truman Boyes wrote: On 13/07/2010, at 4:50 PM, Dobbins, Roland wrote: On Jul 13, 2010, at 1:34 PM, Sharef Mustafa wrote: do you recommend it? My comment would be that a software-based BRAS - 7200, Vyatta, et. al. - is no longer viable in today's Inte

Re: Vyatta as a BRAS

On Jul 13, 2010, at 3:00 PM, wrote: > I agree software-based deployments have their flaws but I do not agree that > it cannot be managed securely with comparable or exceeding uptime -vs- a drop > in appliance. I firmly believe it has it's place in 'today's internet'. When a single botted/mis

Re: Vyatta as a BRAS

ul 2010 16:56:16 To: Dobbins, Roland Cc: NANOG list Subject: Re: Vyatta as a BRAS On 13/07/2010, at 4:50 PM, Dobbins, Roland wrote: > > On Jul 13, 2010, at 1:34 PM, Sharef Mustafa wrote: > >> do you recommend it? > > > My comment would be that a software-based BRAS - 72

Re: Vyatta as a BRAS

On 13/07/2010, at 4:50 PM, Dobbins, Roland wrote: > > On Jul 13, 2010, at 1:34 PM, Sharef Mustafa wrote: > >> do you recommend it? > > > My comment would be that a software-based BRAS - 7200, Vyatta, et. al. - is > no longer viable in today's Internet, and hasn't been for years, due to > se

Re: Vyatta as a BRAS

On Jul 13, 2010, at 1:34 PM, Sharef Mustafa wrote: > do you recommend it? My comment would be that a software-based BRAS - 7200, Vyatta, et. al. - is no longer viable in today's Internet, and hasn't been for years, due to security/availability concerns. Same for peering/transit edge, custome