On Tue, 10 Jun 2003, Florian Weimer wrote: > In general, the forwarding performance is nowadays specified in pps > and even flows per second if you look carefully at the data sheets. Ok, this is interesting. I have never seen the flows per second used for simple L3 forwading. I have seen them being used for NAT or firewalling. Looking at the sprint traffic patterns, i think flows/sec is a meaningful metric. > Most vendors have learnt that people want routers with comforting > worst-case behavior. However, you have to read carefully, e.g. a > Catalyst 6500 with Supervisor Engine 1 (instead of 2) can only create > 650,000 flows per second, even if it has a much, much higher peak IP > forwarding rate. > So 2Mpps of 650Kflows/sec ? > (The times of routers which died when confronted with a rapid ICMP > sweep across a /16 are gone for good, I hope.) We should be able to punish specific misbehaving flows. Do you know if any routers are implementing proper DOS tracebacks to allow for inserting drop filters? cheers, jamal - : send the line "unsubscribe linux-net" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
