The MPLS-OPS Archive

[Puddinhead Wilson <puddinghead_wilson007@yahoo.co.uk>]

fine, 

but if someone asked you where you could find them ,
would you be nice enough to tell them :)?

-thanks

 --- "McCallum, Robert" <robert.mccallum@thus.net>
wrote: 
> Thinks about what this end device would need to do
> to be able to do that
> properly.
> 
> Have a sizable routing table.
> Hold a full LIB for the whole network.
> RSVP signalling.
> 
> Are we going to bring in FRR as well?  
> 
> All of the above can be done oddly enough on devices
> called routers.  Leave
> the end device to be noddy and let the magic get
> done on boxes that it
> should be done on.
> 
> I still don't see any benefit from an mpls nic.
> 
> Robert McCallum 
> CCIE #8757 R&S
> 01415663448
> 07818002241 
> 
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Bjørn Mork [mailto:bjorn@mork.no] 
> > Sent: 20 August 2004 12:33
> > To: Bell, John
> > Cc: McCallum, Robert; 'Puddinhead Wilson';
> mpls-ops@mplsrc.com
> > Subject: Re: [MPLS-OPS]: MPLS aware NICs
> > 
> > 
> > "Bell, John" <john.bell@thus.net> writes:
> > 
> > > 	None that I'm aware of. As Steinar says, you'd
> have to 
> > run a routing 
> > > protocol on your workstation/server for it to
> make any 
> > sense. Equally, 
> > > making an NIC MPLS-aware means writing an MPLS
> stack in 
> > software, so I 
> > > suppose  some guys in a Uni lab may write their
> own MPLS-aware NIC 
> > > stack as a project, and run "routed" on a Linux
> box, just to 
> > > understand whats happening. But there will never
> be a commercial 
> > > reason to do it, as you need to turn your server
> into a software 
> > > router. As we all know, this is a crappy idea
> when there 
> > are perfectly 
> > > good (i.e a million times better) hardware
> routers around :-)
> > 
> > Let's say you want to do policy routing on your
> edge, 
> > redirecting some packets to one or more servers
> located at a 
> > central server farm.  To do this you need tunnels
> from the 
> > edge routers to these servers.  Why not use MPLS
> tunnels?  
> > The servers will have to terminate the tunnels no
> matter what 
> > protocol is used.  But they don't have to do any
> forwarding, 
> > and they don't really have to participate in the
> routing exchange.
> > 
> > I'd say that popping a label is much preferred to
> unwrapping 
> > ipsec or gre or whatever, even if you don't
> qualify as a router ;-)
> > 
> > 
> > Bjørn
> > 
>  


	
	
		
___________________________________________________________ALL-NEW Yahoo! Messenger - all new features - even more fun!  http://uk.messenger.yahoo.com

-------
The MPLS-OPS Mailing List
Subscribe/Unsubscribe:  http://www.mplsrc.com/mplsops.shtml
Archive: http://www.mplsrc.com/mpls-ops_archive.shtml