Date: Tue, 06 Jan 1998 20:40:37 -0500 From: dennis <dennis@etinc.com> To: "Tyson Boellstorff" <tboellst@willinet.net>, "MegaFred" <mfred@zen.triax.com> Cc: "=?iso-8859-1?Q?=22Luis_E._Mu=F1oz=22?=" <lem@cantv.net>, "freebsd mailing list" <freebsd-isp@freebsd.org> Subject: Re: ISP Conversion Message-ID: <3.0.32.19980106204036.00a29740@etinc.com>
next in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
At 04:48 PM 1/6/98 -0600, Tyson Boellstorff wrote: >>> >>> this is so silly. Please read http://www.etinc.com/routers.htm for the >other >>> side of this ridiculous set of arguments. >> >>I'm reading this page, and can't really tell. Are you for or against the >>idea of custom-built PC routers? > > >I think that when each can be an appropriate tool in the appropriate >situation. I've used PC routers in the past with great success. I also use >them as centrally located places for network access tools. If the load gets >too heavy, I move the load off. Simple as that. I get really high loads, I >might go with Cisco, but then again, it all depends on how I'm setting >things up. Failure can affect many things, routers and PC's are no >exception. A lower MTBF can be compensated for. Plan carefully regardless of >how you route. A 25XX series with really heavy loads (particularly with 2 ethernets) is a much less capable box than a unix router, so what fuels that choice? Is it the company you are going with?...they have lots of different products. We're arguing about what's appropriate. PC routers are just are reliable as standalones when used only as a router, the question with a unix box is how much other server stuff (if any) do you put on it. db
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?3.0.32.19980106204036.00a29740>