On Fri, 30 Sep 2011, Nick Hilliard wrote:
On 30/09/2011 15:45, Christopher Morrow wrote:
traceroute could certainly be handled in the fastpath.
which traceroute? icmp? udp? tcp? Traceroute is not a single protocol.
what is that limit? from a single port? from a single linecard? from a chassis? how about we remove complexity here and just deal with this in the fastpath?
on a pfc3, the mls rate limiters deal with handling all punts from the chassis to the RP. It's difficult to handle this in any other way.
My point in calling this all 'stupid' is that by now we all have been burned by this sort of behavior, vendors have heard from all of us that 'this is really not a good answer', enough is enough please stop doing this.
"This is a Hard Problem". There is a balance to be drawn between hardware complexity, cost and lifecycle. In the case of the PFC3, we're talking about hardware which was released in 2000 - 11 years ago. The ipv6 fragment punting problem was fixed in the pfc3c, which was released in 2003. I'm aware that cisco is still selling the pfc3b, but they really only push the rsp720 for internet stuff (if they're pushing the 6500/7600 line at all).
They are pushing sup2T - however more for enterprise ip layer (6500 series). Regards, Janos Mohacsi