From owner-freebsd-isp Thu Aug 14 07:28:11 1997 Return-Path: Received: (from root@localhost) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.5/8.8.5) id HAA20194 for isp-outgoing; Thu, 14 Aug 1997 07:28:11 -0700 (PDT) Received: from etinc.com (et-gw-fr1.etinc.com [204.141.244.98]) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.5/8.8.5) with ESMTP id HAA20189 for ; Thu, 14 Aug 1997 07:28:08 -0700 (PDT) Received: from ntws (ntws.etinc.com [204.141.95.142]) by etinc.com (8.8.3/8.6.9) with SMTP id KAA08565; Thu, 14 Aug 1997 10:39:10 -0400 (EDT) Message-Id: <3.0.32.19970814102704.00ddce50@etinc.com> X-Sender: dennis@etinc.com X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0 (32) Date: Thu, 14 Aug 1997 10:27:08 -0400 To: Edwin Culp , "Daniel O'Callaghan" From: dennis Subject: Re: Multi-homed - Load Balancing - No Single Point of Failure Cc: "Randy A. Katz" , isp@FreeBSD.ORG Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Sender: owner-freebsd-isp@FreeBSD.ORG X-Loop: FreeBSD.org Precedence: bulk At 08:17 AM 8/14/97 -0500, Edwin Culp wrote: >Daniel O'Callaghan wrote: >> >> On Wed, 13 Aug 1997, Randy A. Katz wrote: >> >> > Given two upstream providers is it possible to use a single or two FreeBSD >> > boxes to do BGP routing and load balancing? And if so, what equipment >> > should we use? T1 Cards? Routers? >> > >> > My current provider is telling us we need a Cisco 4700 (20-30,000). I was >> > thinking if I could get a powerfull FreeBSD box (200MHz Pro/MMX with 128MB >> > RAM) to do the routing it would be just as good and about 20,000 less >> > expensive...please let me know if I'm off my rocker! >> >> You *are* off your rocker to get a PPro200 128MB RAM. Depending on you >> bandwidth needs, you only need a P-133 with 64MB of RAM :-) I have a >> 686-120/P150+ with 5 ethernet cards and about 1000 kbps flowing through it >> - i.e. a 66% utilised T1. CPU utilisation is about 10%, and a significant >> amount of that is servicing interrupts on the PCI-NE2000 ethernet cards, >> and checking the 470 ipfw rules I have loaded. Use de or fxp ethernet >> cards in preference (the two busy cards in my box are de type). I'd >> recommend a 686-150/P200+ to keep packet latency down. Use gated for BGP >> peering. The "overhead" of bringing in the data on an ethernet card and a PCI sync card is about the same (questioning the need for an external router if you will be doing BGP4 in unix). >> >> Dennis will probably remind you to look at www.etinc.com regarding >> synchronous serial cards. > >But will he actually sell them? Any what does this mean, oh mighty one? Dennis