[f-nsp] MLX vs. TurboIron and Vyatta

[George B.]

On the other hand, the TurboIron's are cut through switches, not store
and forward so they shouldn't NEED as large a buffer.  And if you have
enough congestion to cause  packet drop, you want TCP to back off a
little.  They have enough buffer to handle most microburst.
conditions.  Give them plenty of uplink and it shouldn't be a problem.
 I generally use 20 to 40G of uplink capacity depending on the
downlink capability.



On Sat, Apr 7, 2012 at 8:16 AM, Nick Hilliard <nick at foobar.org> wrote:
> On 7 Apr 2012, at 14:32, Greg Dok <gregdok at gmail.com> wrote:
>> Though we understand, Vyatta is pretty stable nowadays and would just work well with next-hop attribute as long as the network don’t change too often.
>
> Vyatta uses quagga as its rib management engine. Not sure about the vyatta branch, but mainline quagga is-is support is flaky.
>
> Turboirons are ok switches but they have very small port buffers. This may or may not be a concern for you.
>
> Which solution is best for you depends on lots of details,  eg your budget, expected traffic rates, support requirements, power and space issues, etc.
>
> Nick
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> foundry-nsp mailing list
> foundry-nsp at puck.nether.net
> http://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/foundry-nsp