From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Jamal Hadi <hadi@shell.cyberus.ca>
Subject: Re: Route cache performance tests
Date: Tue, 10 Jun 2003 09:39:38 -0400 (EDT)
Sender: linux-net-owner@vger.kernel.org
Message-ID: <20030610093747.I37351@shell.cyberus.ca>
References: <20030610075732.GD23009@netnation.com> <Pine.LNX.4.51.0306100928070.26498@ns.istop.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Cc: Simon Kirby <sim@netnation.com>, CIT/Paul <xerox@foonet.net>,
	"'David S. Miller'" <davem@redhat.com>,
	"fw@deneb.enyo.de" <fw@deneb.enyo.de>,
	"netdev@oss.sgi.com" <netdev@oss.sgi.com>,
	"linux-net@vger.kernel.org" <linux-net@vger.kernel.org>
Return-path: <linux-net-owner@vger.kernel.org>
To: ralph+d@istop.com
In-Reply-To: <Pine.LNX.4.51.0306100928070.26498@ns.istop.com>
List-Id: netdev.vger.kernel.org



On Tue, 10 Jun 2003, Ralph Doncaster wrote:

> I hope that's sarcasm.  I know if you posted to NANOG saying it took a
> dual 1.4Ghz Opteron to route 39kpps under linux you'd be laughed off the
> list.  Maybe I should be bragging about my 3-minute lap times on the
> Shannonville track in my M5!

Ralph,
Take a look at the sprint core routers i posted earlier. See how much
data they actually route ;->
This are damn expensive routers btw with OC48 interface.

On your other comment on being able to get rid of the route cache when you
dont need it, i am actually indifferent. You may have a point.

cheers,
jamal