From owner-freebsd-isp Tue Nov 19 15:48:52 1996 Return-Path: owner-isp Received: (from root@localhost) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.7.5/8.7.3) id PAA16671 for isp-outgoing; Tue, 19 Nov 1996 15:48:52 -0800 (PST) Received: from etinc.com (et-gw-fr1.etinc.com [204.141.244.98]) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.7.5/8.7.3) with SMTP id PAA16666 for ; Tue, 19 Nov 1996 15:48:49 -0800 (PST) Received: from ntws (ntws.etinc.com [204.141.95.142]) by etinc.com (8.6.12/8.6.9) with SMTP id SAA09938; Tue, 19 Nov 1996 18:55:07 -0500 Date: Tue, 19 Nov 1996 18:55:07 -0500 Message-Id: <199611192355.SAA09938@etinc.com> X-Sender: dennis@etinc.com X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Version 2.0.3 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" To: Tony Li From: dennis@etinc.com (dennis) Subject: Re: changed to: Frac T3? Cc: isp@freebsd.org Sender: owner-isp@freebsd.org X-Loop: FreeBSD.org Precedence: bulk T. Li writes... > We're not really concerned with "outages" here, its routing load, which at > T1 simply isnt an issue for a low powered pentium running freebsd and a > busy web and mail server. > >Excuse me, but outages are paramount. They are the direct result of >technology failure and are the metric of user pain and anguish. I agree >that the routing load is not an issue, however, the load of a busy web and >mail server may cause routing to fail. Doesnt in practice...thats the point... A web server cant be busier than the bandwidth...its rather measurable, and one or even 2 T1s is just not enough load to justify an external router with 1/5th the horsepower. > > If you're implication is that a 2501 and an NT server is somehow more > reliable than a freebsd box with a card, I think you'll bet a lot of > disagreement on this list. > >I'm not trying to imply anything other than what I'm saying outright: >running significant services on the same Unix box that you've got running >mission-critical routing is going to be less reliable than a situation >where routing does not have competition for resources. I reject your premise based on the fact that the routing is an implicit function of the mail and web servers, and that there is no greater load routing from a serial port to a service than from an ethernet to a service. Certainly at some point you need a dedicated router with multiple external servers, but T1 is a breeze to route, and a waste of resources to dedicate a Pentium just to routing. I think that you are talking about backbone routers and we're talking about something smaller...one or 2 t1 installations. Obviously at T3 you won't be running a web server on the box! Dennis