Date: Sun, 30 Jan 2000 19:04:53 +0100 (CET) From: Luigi Rizzo <luigi@info.iet.unipi.it> To: Daniel Jacobs <danielj@wizard.com> Cc: freebsd-isp@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Bandwidth limiting on Switch. Message-ID: <200001301804.TAA35370@info.iet.unipi.it> In-Reply-To: <Pine.BSF.4.21.0001300913320.64750-100000@shell.wizard.com> from Daniel Jacobs at "Jan 30, 2000 09:14:30 am"
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
this seems a thread back from the past, but in any case what do you think is > On Fri, 14 Jan 2000, Nicholas J. Dear wrote: > > > On 14 Jan 00, at 8:45, Intranova Networking Group wrote: > > > > > Either you can use a hardware solution (Ethernet switch) or you can use a > > > software solution, which includes the dummynet bandwidth ... > > Definitely hardware solution. Do you recommend a particular product? > > Preferably Cisco or 3com? what makes you think that a switch which is capable of doing bandwidth limiting is more a 'hardware solution' than a PicoBSD bridge running ipfw+dummynet, especially at the very low bandwidths you are interested in ? For sure, in a switch theere is dedicated hardware in charge of doing the packet forwarding, but the scheduling is a typical software/firmware task and only boxes which need to do WFQ at 100Mbit/s or so really need to put the scheduler on silicon. then of course you can always claim "nobody has ever been fired for buying IBM..." cheers luigi -----------------------------------+------------------------------------- Luigi RIZZO, luigi@iet.unipi.it . Dip. di Ing. dell'Informazione http://www.iet.unipi.it/~luigi/ . Universita` di Pisa TEL/FAX: +39-050-568.533/522 . via Diotisalvi 2, 56126 PISA (Italy) Mobile +39-347-0373137 -----------------------------------+------------------------------------- To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-isp" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?200001301804.TAA35370>