From owner-freebsd-isp  Wed Jan  3  6:18:53 2001
From owner-freebsd-isp@FreeBSD.ORG  Wed Jan  3 06:18:51 2001
Return-Path: <owner-freebsd-isp@FreeBSD.ORG>
Delivered-To: freebsd-isp@freebsd.org
Received: from ns.shawneelink.net (ns.shawneelink.net [216.240.66.11])
	by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B654237B402
	for <freebsd-isp@FreeBSD.ORG>; Wed,  3 Jan 2001 06:18:50 -0800 (PST)
Received: from ns.shawneelink.net (ns.shawneelink.net [216.240.66.11])
	by ns.shawneelink.net (8.10.1/8.10.1) with ESMTP id f03EIi316263
	for <freebsd-isp@FreeBSD.ORG>; Wed, 3 Jan 2001 08:18:44 -0600 (CST)
Date: Wed, 3 Jan 2001 08:18:44 -0600 (CST)
From: J Bacher <jb@jbacher.com>
X-Sender: jb@ns.shawneelink.net
To: freebsd-isp@FreeBSD.ORG
Subject: Re: 2 cisco's and a fbsd box running bgp
In-Reply-To: <3A52C152.A75D1882@quake.com.au>
Message-ID: <Pine.OSF.4.21.0101030817570.15661-100000@ns.shawneelink.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Sender: owner-freebsd-isp@FreeBSD.ORG
Precedence: bulk
X-Loop: FreeBSD.org



On Wed, 3 Jan 2001, Kal Torak wrote:

> Dont get me wrong, cisco's are great, it just dosent make
> sense to add extra layers of routing when you dont need to!

From the perspective of "don't put all of your eggs in one basket" it
does.



To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-isp" in the body of the message