From owner-freebsd-isp Wed Dec 12 19:31:25 2001 Delivered-To: freebsd-isp@freebsd.org Received: from pericles.IPAustralia.gov.au (pericles.IPAustralia.gov.au [202.14.186.30]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3E02B37B434 for ; Wed, 12 Dec 2001 19:31:08 -0800 (PST) Received: (from smap@localhost) by pericles.IPAustralia.gov.au (8.11.3/8.11.1) id fBD3V6X63714 for ; Thu, 13 Dec 2001 14:31:06 +1100 (EST) (envelope-from Stanley.Hopcroft@IPAustralia.gov.au) Received: from pc09011.aipo.gov.au(10.0.3.110) by pericles.IPAustralia.gov.au via smap (V2.1) id xma063699; Thu, 13 Dec 01 14:30:48 +1100 Received: (from anwsmh@localhost) by pc09011.aipo.gov.au (8.11.3/8.11.1) id fBD3Umr48609 for isp@FreeBSD.ORG; Thu, 13 Dec 2001 14:30:48 +1100 (EST) (envelope-from anwsmh) Date: Thu, 13 Dec 2001 14:30:48 +1100 From: Stanley Hopcroft To: isp@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Router based on FreeBSD vs Cisco Router Message-ID: <20011213143046.L48332@IPAustralia.Gov.AU> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline User-Agent: Mutt/1.2.5i Sender: owner-freebsd-isp@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk List-ID: List-Archive: (Web Archive) List-Help: (List Instructions) List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: X-Loop: FreeBSD.org Dear Ladies and Gentlemen, I am writing with some remarks about the relative merits of a PC (FreeBSD based) router and a hardware/Cisco router. From my limited experience of routers in a medium size government business, it seems to me that one should look very hard at PC based routers rather than hardware, if one wants a very stable and manageable routing platform with a modest number of interfaces. Cisco routers win in my view with exotic/non IETF protocols and (b)leeding edge stuff; they lose as far as stability/maintainability - no user repairable parts (replace the box or at least the main board) and value for money. Measurement/deliverable PC Cisco Notes Flexibility . interfaces + More avail from Cisco . protocols + This is pretty close . integration + eg Snort, argus or ntop . Serial interfaces + Must source 3rd party cards and get them going. Not too bad. Performance NA NA No clear winner (from a non-ISP point of view) Expandability No clear winner. - PC from ethernet mem point of view Value for money + Stability + When Ciscos develop mem problems they reboot; hard to fix. Ease of use . OSPF + Pretty marginal . NAT + . Exotic stuff + ISDN/ATM/OSPF over ISDN . ACL + Again, very close. If you want a modest number of 10/100 ethernet ports - say up to 20 - then you could save both bucks and sweat with a PC based product. Likewise perhaps another good application of a PC router is for redundant internal default gateways (running VRRP) or likewise at the border (with BGP) and a couple of serial cards. If however you want a layer 3 switch, then it seems there is no PC based substitute. Is this generally favourable experience with FreeBSD based PC routers shared by others ? Thank you, Yours sincerely. -- ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Stanley Hopcroft Network Specialist ------------------------------------------------------------------------ '...No man is an island, entire of itself; every man is a piece of the continent, a part of the main. If a clod be washed away by the sea, Europe is the less, as well as if a promontory were, as well as if a manor of thy friend's or of thine own were. Any man's death diminishes me, because I am involved in mankind; and therefore never send to know for whom the bell tolls; it tolls for thee...' from Meditation 17, J Donne. To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-isp" in the body of the message