Re: telnet and router question
From: Adam Maloney (adamm_at_sihope.com)
Date: 07/31/03
- Previous message: Lawrence Farr: "RE: dump directly to remote HDD over ssh"
- In reply to: marlon corleone: "telnet and router question"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Date: Thu, 31 Jul 2003 08:28:16 -0500 (CDT) To: marlon corleone <mmp6107625@yahoo.com>
<rant>
Commercial routers do one thing and do it well - cisco's and Junipers are
not built from commodity PC hardware - they are built specifically to
route packets as fast as possible. You could never get the kind of
throughput and latency on any Windows box that you could with a "real"
router. Same goes for linux and freebsd (sorry) based routers - your off
the shelf PC hardware simply cannot compete on anything but price.
Now, if you're just talking about routing for a small network, maybe 2
interfaces, carry a default route to your ISP, then you could probably
make it work. Lots of people do this because the entry point into "real"
gear is kind of high. But it's pretty amazing what even little cisco's
can do. A 2500 series has 2 T-1 interfaces, and is quite capable of
sustaining both at full speed. Before the routing tables grew too large,
ISP's were running full BGP on these little guys. I say little because a
2500 has a 20MHz 68030 processor, up to 16MB of flash, and up to 16MB of
memory. Not a big box by any standard.
Probably the biggest performance gain on real routers is that the packet
switching can take place interface to interface, without generating an
interrupt for each packet and eating CPU. This means that the processor
doesn't have to "do stuff" for each packet, which is why 7200's can
achieve 250,000+ packets per second.
Bigger routers add additional horsepower, but the CPU clock doesn't matter
as much as the special interfaces designed for switching packets, route
switch processors, etc. A cisco 7200 has a 250MHz (give or take) R7000
MIPS processor (think SGI), up to 256MB RAM. But by PC standards that's
not a very fast machine - but I would put my money on the 7200 being able
to handle a couple full DS-3's, some ATM (maybe IMA to make it
interesting), an 8-port T-1 card, a couple fast ether's, and full BGP. A
windows box would just catch fire or whatever it is that they do these
days when things don't go their way :)
And throughput isn't everything - assuming you could build a PC that could
handle that kind of throughput, I would still have my money on the "real"
router providing less latency, fewer drops, etc.
But, if your application doesn't call for that kind of load, and you want
to save a few bucks, then a PC might do.
Cisco IOS has had SSH capability for awhile now, so telnet isn't
necessary. You just need to make sure you have a copy of IOS that
supports it.
</rant>
Adam Maloney
Systems Administrator
Sihope Communications
On Wed, 30 Jul 2003, marlon corleone wrote:
> why is it router is invented, since in windows BOX it
> can act as a router which has ICS builtin, and 2nd why
> is it most routers configured through telnet services
> since it is being considered as "inseceure". can a
> router be configured through SSH, since it was being
> favored to be used for better security.
>
> __________________________________
> Do you Yahoo!?
> Yahoo! SiteBuilder - Free, easy-to-use web site design software
> http://sitebuilder.yahoo.com
> _______________________________________________
> freebsd-isp@freebsd.org mailing list
> http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-isp
> To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-isp-unsubscribe@freebsd.org"
>
_______________________________________________
freebsd-isp@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-isp
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-isp-unsubscribe@freebsd.org"
- Previous message: Lawrence Farr: "RE: dump directly to remote HDD over ssh"
- In reply to: marlon corleone: "telnet and router question"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Relevant Pages
- Re: Routing problems
... and is why we can't set them to the WAN routers for direct access (the ... Sprint
routers only have routes to the main office and the two branches, ... Linux box here,
it has two NICs in it, one on the .1 subnet and one on the ... > routers forward packets
to the routers in your main office. ... (comp.os.linux.networking) - Re: Does QOS on an 828 or 837 actually achieve anything?
... > SDSL VPN, and inevitably they occasionally get sound quality problems. ...
> - all the public Internet routers between the two sites will ignore any ... > settings
on packets I generate ... > If I understand correctly I can use QOS on the router
to control how the ... (comp.dcom.sys.cisco) - Re: 0.0.0.0 Probes
... According to RFC 1812, all routers "SHOULD NOT originate datagrams addressed
... "There MAY be a configuration option to allow generation of these packets ...
You can take a capture of this traffic with the following command on your ... (Security-Basics) - Re: email disappearing
... > routing the packets into the NTL/Telewest network when it should have gone ...
suggest they should be able to route them to their destination, ... they'd fail at the
first NTL/TW router. ... packets being bounced between 2 routers, if the NTL/TW
network was trying to ... (uk.telecom.broadband) - RE: [despammed] [Full-Disclosure] Win32 Cisco Exploit
... Didnt see any suspect packets on tcp or udp didn't check other ... I just tested
it against one of my test cisco routers. ... > According to protocol trace file analysis
it does generate the correct ... > Subject: [Full-Disclosure] Win32 Cisco Exploit ...
(Full-Disclosure)