Date: Tue, 1 Jun 1999 17:41:21 -0700 (PDT) From: Jaye Mathisen <mrcpu@internetcds.com> To: Lowell Gilbert <lowell@world.std.com> Cc: freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: FreeBSD as a Dedicated Router Message-ID: <Pine.BSF.4.10.9906011738310.285-100000@schizo.cdsnet.net> In-Reply-To: <rd6wvxo3wvq.fsf@world.std.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On 1 Jun 1999, Lowell Gilbert wrote: > Doug White <dwhite@resnet.uoregon.edu> writes: > > > I wouldn't suggest it for a core router, but for a small office router on > > up it should be OK. > > Good summary of the performance issues. In my own opinion, I don't > think anything that does its forwarding in software is fast enough for > the Internet core. But then again, I work on stuff that *is* meant > for the core. > Well, like anything, it all depends on your definition of core/load, but FreeBSD using ET's T1 cards, and 4 portt ethernet cards from Znyx is handling significantly higher than "small office router" loads, trivially, with 3-4% CPU usage, including firewalling. I'm only using P6-200's on supermicro MB's, but I see no reason to believe that this won't scale to 12 T1's and 4-8 ethernet ports easily. PCI bandwidth may be an issue, but that's all I can think of. (Your other issues of compliancy are valid, but I suspect non-issues in the current world, generally speaking). To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-questions" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?Pine.BSF.4.10.9906011738310.285-100000>