*shit. You have no clues. Linux was better at networking than BSD even in 1.2.x days ...
IIRC Linux didn't have VLSM in the 1.2.x tree, I seem to remember hacking GateD for ages to make it work at University only to find it wasn't GateD that was broken. The code for Linux hadn't been written. I then moved to work with NetBSD. In my opinion, and I've been using PC's and Sparcs to route for over 4 years now, all the Unices have their pros and cons, I use alot of NetBSD at home, but I use BSD/OS at work because of the support. I did use NetBSD with a ATM interface and BGP4 a while back and it did actually work although I doubt it could have driven 155M. There is a limit however that one hits when you really need hardware that is dedicated to routing. I recently have spent alot of time with several different vendors and to be honest all the vendors have their problems. The trick is to identify which one can deal with them the quickest, and there are some that need to wake up in a big way. followups to comp.os.*.advocacy Regards, Neil.
All the limitations of the Linux/PC router are due to the PC hardware architecture. As seen on the list, people put 8 cards in the same PC. This exceeds the bus speed of a PC. Even a single 100Mbps NIC kills the PCI bus in most PCs should it run full speed. Also, you have to be very carefull with the NIC you choose.
PCs simply were not built for forwarding packets and fast I/O.
Of course a Linux/PC will never beat a cisco :-) but the cost is sometimes an order of magnitude lower for roughly the same performance.
-- Matei CONOVICI, cmatei@roedu.net
-- Neil J. McRae. Alive and Kicking. Domino: In the glow of the night. neil@DOMINO.ORG NetBSD/sparc: 100% SpF (Solaris protection Factor) Free the daemon in your <A HREF="http://www.NetBSD.ORG/">computer!</A>