[nsp] Throughput of 100 Mbps

[Zach Wilkinson]

Linux or _BSD can do OSPF with the help of Quagga http://www.quagga.net or
similar routing daemon.

Zach

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Vincent De Keyzer" <vincent at dekeyzer.net>
To: <cisco-nsp at puck.nether.net>
Sent: Friday, November 07, 2003 5:09 AM
Subject: RE: [nsp] Throughput of 100 Mbps


> Thanks for the many diverse and creative answers. Some more info about the
> issue, to answer the questions that have been asked:
>
> The goal is to connect 3 LANs (in 3 differents areas of the city) to form
a
> triangle with speeds of 100 Mbps, 34 Mbps and 8 Mbps. If one of the 3
links
> goes down, traffic should be rerouted over the other two links. A very
basic
> setup, as you can see.
>
> The links have an Ethernet presentation for port price reasons; although
the
> 34 Mbps link is an E3 (from a transmission point of view), there is an
> E3-to-FE converter at both ends of it.
>
> I was hoping to get away with (floating) static routes; but now I realise
> that due to these converters, the line protocol might stay up on the FE
> interface when the link is down (keepalives being answered by the
> converter). So I might need OSPF - or even RIP.
>
> Is OSPF/RIP supported by the 3550, Linux/FreeBSD box or other solutions
that
> have been suggested?
>
> Vincent
>
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Robert A. Hayden [mailto:rhayden at geek.net]
> > Sent: jeudi 6 novembre 2003 23:04
> > To: Vincent De Keyzer
> > Cc: cisco-nsp at puck.nether.net
> > Subject: Re: [nsp] Throughput of 100 Mbps
> >
> >
> > You don't say what kind of connections and what feature set?
> > A 3550 is a pretty good layer2/3 widget.
> >
> > On Thu, 6 Nov 2003, Vincent De Keyzer wrote:
> >
> > > Hi,
> > >
> > > what's the smallest (read: cheapest :-) router that can process 100
> > > Mbps of traffic?
> > >
> > > Playing with a 3620, I could only get around 40 Mbps. What
> > next? Do I
> > > need 7200? What about the 2600 XM, which I know very little
> > about?...
> > >
> > > Vincent
> > >
> > > PS: the machine in question would not need to do anything such as
> > > filtering, or huge routing tables. Just a handful of
> > (static?) routes.
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> cisco-nsp mailing list  cisco-nsp at puck.nether.net
> https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nsp
> archive at http://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-nsp/
>