Internet Core Routing - Ethernet
Folks, Recently there was a string about L3 Switches in the core. I really don't like this string because I belive it reflects NANOG in a very bad light and I'm going to speak up here. 1. Why are you talking about vendors when you should be talking about technology on this list. Just like the charters. I would recommend to NANOG "if you disagree, say nay" that any post to NANOG with a vendor name in it be sent to the vendor for comment before being posted to the list. Just my 2 cents here. 2. Ethernet is the technology. If you don't see it, you are blind. Let's talk about Internet core routing in those terms. Sure, all vendors suck, but some suck WAY more than others. I think we all know the names. I would love to be challenged on my knowledge of ethernet as a network engineer. I know way more than I ever did about token ring. Wake up. How many routes can vendor X support with IBGP Nailed Routes? What is the convergence time for 100,000 routes? Does vendor Z have wire-speed ACL,s, PBR, MPLS? 10GigE? How much does that cost? Does vendor Y have any reference customers? Let me see the video? How do I manage CAM? I think we all know who the strong vendors are. There are a few that will be around for awhile. Bobby _________________________________________________________________ MSN Photos is the easiest way to share and print your photos: http://photos.msn.com/support/worldwide.aspx
On Sat, 28 Sep 2002, Bob Martinez wrote:
Operations has alot to do with experience with specific equipment, more so then it does abstracted conversations about theoretical configurations. There are abundant protocols that lack implementation. Many people believe they can instantiate an implementation by writing an RFC, or so you would get the impression by reading RFCs. Regarding "be sent to the vendor for comment before being posted", your question about "Does vendor Z have wire-speed X?" has produced outright lies for the last 10 years. There is *always* a catch to any such claims regarding routers. Take posts to NANOG with a grain of salt. There is a large range of experience. BTW, you listed a bunch of questions. Please post a specific one you want to know about. You might get it answered. +----------------- H U R R I C A N E - E L E C T R I C -----------------+ | Mike Leber Direct Internet Connections Voice 510 580 4100 | | Hurricane Electric Web Hosting Colocation Fax 510 580 4151 | | mleber@he.net http://www.he.net | +-----------------------------------------------------------------------+
On Sat, 28 Sep 2002 06:21:17 -0000, Bob Martinez <bobmartinezzz@hotmail.com> said:
Hmm... so if somebody posts to the list with the problem, and somebody else saw that same issue and got a fix from the vendor, they need to send it to the vendor for comment, or they can say "Oh, you're being bit by bug (can't say because it would identify the vendor) in a (vendor model you can't say) several hops upstream from you".
talk about Internet core routing in those terms. Sure, all vendors suck, but some suck WAY more than others. I think we all know the names. I would
And how did we learn the names? Let's see.. Cisco, Juniper, Proteon, Bay, add whatever names you want. You probably have your own opinions on what each piece of gear is good at. Now, did you actually *buy* and *use* all of that gear yourself? Or did you let the common knowledge base called NANOG help you out? Remember that learning from the mistakes and mishaps of others is a lot cheaper than doing them yourself...
Which would you trust for any of these numbers - a salesdroid *saying* a number, or 5 different people on the NANOG list who have all seen a much lower-performance number out in the field? How helpful would this list be if vendors had the right to squelch any adverse publicity?
2. Ethernet is the technology.
Excuse me if I chuckle, having heard THAT before in the last 2 decades or so. I've learned to not take *anybody* seriously when they say something is "THE" anything. Structured programming wasn't the end-all, nor was ATM, nor was Java, nor will XML or Ethernet. Yes, 10G-E will probably see wide deployment. But I'll make a prediction - there will be something else coming out to replace it long before it finishes replacing what's out there now. (For bonus points, compare the level-1 media characteristics of the original 10mbit-over-thickwire with the 10gig-over-optical, and ask yourself if there's anything in common other than the name. It's amazingly reminiscent of the saying "I don't know what language number-crunchers will use 20 years from now, but it will be called Fortran"....) -- Valdis Kletnieks Computer Systems Senior Engineer Virginia Tech
Thus spake <Valdis.Kletnieks@vt.edu>
The electrical characteristics of 10BaseT aren't all that similar to 10Base[25] either. However, all of the 802.3 variants use CSMA/CD for half-duplex operation, and 802.11's CSMA/CA is reasonably similar. All of the 802.3 and 802.11 variants use the same MAC and LLC layers. Sure, the framing and modulation has varied over time. GE's undersize-frame packing was a neat innovation, 10GE's elimination of half-duplex was a bit overdue, jumbo frames could be neat if they ever get deployed, and 802.1p/q opened a lot of doors. However, throughout Ethernet's evolution, it's remained essentially the same beast from the user's perspective, and the L2 operation is still the same. Do I get my bonus points? :) S
participants (4)
-
Bob Martinez
-
Mike Leber
-
Stephen Sprunk
-
Valdis.Kletnieks@vt.edu