[email protected]
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: questions on draft-bryant-ipfrr-tunnels-01.txt

Subject: Re: questions on draft-bryant-ipfrr-tunnels-01.txt
From: Alia Atlas
Date: Wed, 24 Nov 2004 17:42:44 -0500
At 05:22 PM 11/24/2004, Naiming Shen wrote:
This is true.  The performance issues of older hardware from specific
vendors is out of scope for a discussion of the protocols although it
is a practical consideration for providers that have certain older
hardware.  I don't pretend to know which hardware can and can't do
this, but I do think its quite a lot of it.
You might be surprised on this, since it's not just with the legacy
hardware pieces, even the new ones, with increasing demand on services,
features, and marketing requirement for small packet in line rate,
this is one place performance can be boosted. Of course, this has
"nothing" to do with the protocol design ;-)
Indirection is powerful, but can come at a performance cost. It doesn't
have to; the hardware may need to fetch a memory location anyway, for
instance, and this could just have the same memory location used multiple
places. The side-benefit is that it can save substantially on FIB memory.
As you say, nothing to do with protocol design, except that the protocol
hierarchy makes it useful :-)
Alia


_______________________________________________
Rtgwg mailing list
[email protected]
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/rtgwg

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>