RE: MPLS aware NICs (possible ??)

Hi,

One more thing... If we talk about for a particular OS like Linux , it supports OSPF ,BGP and other routing functions once enabled Zebra rpm......As well as some project work is going on for MPLS aware linux forwarding plane and MPLS signaling (mplsadm2 -- rpm).

If this kind of activities are going ,that means , NIC must be MPLS aware.

One more doubt... Can we change the MTU size on NIC level?

Thanks & Regards

Abhishek Mittal

"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" writes:
>
&g! t; > 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
>

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

Do you Yahoo!?
New and Improved Yahoo! Mail - Send 10MB messages!

The MPLS-OPS Archive

RE: MPLS aware NICs (possible ??)