From owner-freebsd-isp Tue Nov 19 14:33:14 1996 Return-Path: owner-isp Received: (from root@localhost) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.7.5/8.7.3) id OAA11586 for isp-outgoing; Tue, 19 Nov 1996 14:33:14 -0800 (PST) Received: from red.jnx.com (red.jnx.com [208.197.169.254]) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.7.5/8.7.3) with ESMTP id OAA11575 for ; Tue, 19 Nov 1996 14:33:04 -0800 (PST) Received: from chimp.jnx.com (chimp.jnx.com [208.197.169.246]) by red.jnx.com (8.8.3/8.8.3) with ESMTP id OAA12859; Tue, 19 Nov 1996 14:32:29 -0800 (PST) Received: (from tli@localhost) by chimp.jnx.com (8.7.6/8.7.3) id OAA16231; Tue, 19 Nov 1996 14:32:19 -0800 (PST) Date: Tue, 19 Nov 1996 14:32:19 -0800 (PST) Message-Id: <199611192232.OAA16231@chimp.jnx.com> From: Tony Li To: dennis@etinc.com CC: isp@freebsd.org In-reply-to: <199611191536.KAA07083@etinc.com> (dennis@etinc.com) Subject: Re: changed to: Frac T3? Sender: owner-isp@freebsd.org X-Loop: FreeBSD.org Precedence: bulk >In fact, there is a _great_ deal of painful experience in dealing with >routers where there isn't quite enough CPU time to get everything done. >Routing protocols are basically soft real-time distributed systems. When >they get delayed, they tend to collapse in spectacular ways. As a result, >putting any significant non-routing load on a router is a _really_ bad >idea. that's 'cause you've been working with machines that have stinky little CPUs :-) Like 150Mhz MIPS boxes. ;-) You're right. Of course, I also consider a PP200 to be a "stinky little CPU", so we still haven't gotten rid of the problem. > You MIGHT be able to get away with it by suitable modifications to ^^^^^^ >>the Unix scheduler, but then it wouldn't be Unix, would it? ;-) And the >>cost of another box to support a server is sufficiently low that it would >>seem to make sense not to risk the routing... The point of this discussion, I believe, was to try to determine what "it" is. As machines get faster, it keeps changing. Certainly there is a limit, but its not totally clear what it is. As I think I pointed out in another message, "it" is a guarantee of cycles and I/O to the routing protocols. Tony