Joshua,
On Wed, 2003-02-05 at 13:59, Joshua Daniel Franklin wrote:
> I''ve searched the list archives and haven''t found any
information on this.
>
> I realize that many users are routing in a home or small office
> environment but I think there is also a place for "enterprise"
> routing. But knowing how to configure the software is only part
> of a low-latency router--you also need good hardware.
Yes, but sometimes software in conjunction with how you using the
hardware. Not one or the other. However as I will mention below I have a
dinosaur that screams.
However I totally agree with you on the "enterprise" aspect. They
stand
to gain the most. I just won''t say that to my buddies that are
engineers
over at Cisco.
> Are there any thoughts on good configurations?
> NICs: I''ve seen several mentions of the Intel eepro NICs. Are they
best?
I prefer Intel cards. Most of my nics are Intel Pro100 S adapters using
Intel''s e100 driver and I couldn''t be happier. However some
prefer some
of Intel''s other drivers that can be fully compiled into the kernel.
Personally I prefer my drivers to be loaded by the kernel, and not part
of. Everything else I do compile into the kernel.
It just so happens I also have also have a Linksys LNE100TX on a picky
machine that will not accept the Intel''s? It uses the tulip driver, and
I have never been able to force duplex and speed on that card. It wants
to remain in auto-negotiate mode? Luckily the machine is not a critical
one. Just a spare machine used for fun and headaches. Since others say
that tulip is a good driver I will assume that nic is a piece of s***.
Another chipset I absolutely hate is anything from
National Semiconductor using the 83815 chipset and
the dp83815 driver.
Another one that I have never been able to force duplex and speed.
Now another really cool thing about Intel nics I like is IANS. Look into
it, as there is much you can do with it.
> Processor: speeds probably don''t matter too much (my Cisco 3640
router
> with 4 T1s has a 100Mhz processor, though it''s RISC and has
optimized IOS)
> but faster processors have faster FSB as well
> Memory: 128 MB probably enough to deal with 100Mb?
> HD: Obviously you want everything in memory, but if you''re doing
much
> logging you might get a solid-state disk.
I would think RAM, the type of RAM and the bus speed to mean more than the proc.
I would imagine 128 to be plenty, depending on how much space is used
for your root file system and how much is left over to be used as
memory. Although I doubt you could go wrong with more memory.
FYI, while my network is much smaller with a smaller load, I have seen
some pretty substantial differences in my Linux gear, and my dedicated
networking devices.
I have a load balancing (sort of) Linux router as my core router. It an
old machine that boots off a zip disk and runs entirely out of RAM.
75mhz Pentium, with 32mb RAM, 16 for file system, 16 for memory. Ancient
RAM. Maybe on a good day 66mhz bus?
All tests so far show that the latency of packets going through it is on
average half that of the latency of packets going through either one of
my Netopia routers, or my Cicso 827.
The Linux router responds twice as fast when being pinged. So there
could definitely be some gains. Although there could also be some draw
backs. That depends on your situation.
> I''ve done a little comparison testing of prebuilt firewall routers
with a
> few little DLink/Sonicwall/Netgear boxes vs. an Athlon running IPCop, but
> I''m sure someone has done better hardware tests than mine.
That would not be me. ;)
--
Sincerely,
William L. Thomson Jr.
Obsidian-Studios, Inc.
439 Amber Way
Petaluma, Ca. 94952
Phone 707.766.9509
Fax 707.766.8989
http://www.obsidian-studios.com
--
Sincerely,
William L. Thomson Jr.
Support Group
Obsidian-Studios Inc.
439 Amber Way
Petaluma, Ca. 94952
Phone 707.766.9509
Fax 707.766.8989
http://www.obsidian-studios.com
_______________________________________________
LARTC mailing list / LARTC@mailman.ds9a.nl
http://mailman.ds9a.nl/mailman/listinfo/lartc HOWTO: http://lartc.org/