LinuxSA Mailing list archives

  From: Dale Long <dalel@loftuscomp.com.au>
  To  : Mark Newton <newton@atdot.dotat.org>
  Date: Thu, 7 Dec 2000 09:50:50 +1030 (CST)

Re: "Host based" routers and BGP

On Wed, 6 Dec 2000, Mark Newton wrote:

> On Wed, Dec 06, 2000 at 09:56:40PM +1030, Dale Long wrote:
> 
>  > What defines a router? Hardware containing as OS optimised for routing
>  > running only routing based services? Or A generic OS (perhaps compiled in
>  > a way that optimises it for routing) running only routing based
>  > processes/services? Or hardware and OS optimised for routing? Surely
>  > network load and so on would dictate what would be be better solution.
>  
> Sigh. 
> 
> Ok, here's why you'd use a dedicated router in a routing role:

You have assumed a middle to high end scenario for routing. What scope is
Jason looking for? It goes without saying that for high capacity systems
you use the best you can get that is optimised for that role. The same
goes for database servers, firewalls, transaction systems and so on.

The worse thing about a PC as a router is that you have a noisy box and
bulky box. Whereas a purpose made rack mounted system with quiet and
redundant power supplies are much better. Even in the scope of print
servers, depending on the site and scenario, a dedicated (or integrated)
print server is often more suitable, less intrusive and less hassle than
reviving a 486 with Linux. Even if it is more costly up front.

But this all depends on the target implementation.
Embeded Linux may enter the area of dedicated routers. Who knows how it
will change. IOS seems to be in need of a rethink.

An unoptimise OS and hardware (eg: Linux or FreeBSD on a PC) may be
suitable for the capacity of some needs.

Dale.

-- 
LinuxSA WWW: http://www.linuxsa.org.au/  IRC: #linuxsa on irc.linux.org.au
To unsubscribe from the LinuxSA list:
  mail linuxsa-request@linuxsa.org.au with "unsubscribe" as the subject