[LARTC] Re: LARTC digest, Vol 1 #1809 - 14 msgs

[José Ildefonso Camargo Tolosa]

Hi!

>Message: 5
>Date: Thu, 08 Jul 2004 17:00:21 +0530
>From: Sudheer Divakaran <sudheer@svw.com>
>To: lartc@mailman.ds9a.nl
>Subject: [LARTC] Is Linux based Router feasible
>
>Hi,
>
>I've a local LAN consisting of about 150 machines.  I'm using a Linux 
>machine as the gateway machine which inturn connects to two different 
>ISPs.  My question is can a Linux based machine match the performance of 
>a hardware based routers provided by Cisco,... OR is my decision to go 
>for a Linux based solution is a wrong one?.
>  
>

I don't like Cisco: You only get good things if you go to high order 
systems, and you have to pay for everything (even software upgrades, if 
you need them).  At the university I work, we have a cisco router, AND a 
linux router/qos/filter/traffic-shaper before it.  Due to the amount of 
clients (>900), and the amount of connections (>8000 at any time, with 
peacks of up to 90.000 (yes, that much)) the cisco router was colapsing, 
we added the linux router and now everything works A LOT better.  We 
have two ISPs, hence two connections, one of 384kbps/128kbps and the 
other of 1024kbps/1024kbps.

Additionally, it is not as durable as you may expect, I saw a cisco 
Catalist 2900 swtich die due to a power peak, and when I looked at the  
power source, there was a filter design problem (this equipment would 
not survive more than one year without a regulator/peak suppresor AND 
external power line filter on any pseudo-industrial enviroment).

>Is there so much difference between these two solutions?
>  
>
Yes, off course.  The Linux solution is somehow difficult to implement 
(but hey, you are not alone, you can come here and ask :) ), but it is 
more flexible, and it is free.

>Can I achieve the same performance using a high end PC and Linux?
>  
>
Even without a high end PC. The solution I told you was implemented with 
a PII 300MHz with 128Mb RAM.

> I'm asking this because one guy told me that my decision to go for a 
>Linux based solution is a wrong one and it can never match the 
>performance of Routers provided by Cisco.
>  
>

If you go for the Cisco high end routers, it would be only harder, but 
you can still match.  See, cisco routers often use very small processors 
(some of them only comparable with K6-II or PIII), you can use an Athlon 
64 with DDR RAM and very good network hardware (that is very, very 
important) and certenly you can match any cisco solution (unless you 
need MANY interfaces, in wich case you would be going to clustering, but 
that is another history and will be expensive).

>Thanks
>Sudheer  
>
>  
>