home *** CD-ROM | disk | FTP | other *** search
- Xref: sparky comp.dcom.isdn:1202 comp.protocols.nfs:3192
- Path: sparky!uunet!olivea!sgigate!sgi!rigden.wpd.sgi.com!rpw3
- From: rpw3@rigden.wpd.sgi.com (Rob Warnock)
- Newsgroups: comp.dcom.isdn,comp.protocols.nfs
- Subject: Re: Low cost ether/isdn brouters (was PC-NFS PPP Serial/ISDN driver wanted)
- Message-ID: <v61am5o@sgi.sgi.com>
- Date: 22 Jan 93 00:47:39 GMT
- Sender: rpw3@rigden.wpd.sgi.com
- Organization: Silicon Graphics, Inc. Mountain View, CA
- Lines: 26
-
- dcarr@gandalf.ca (Dave Carr) writes:
- +---------------
- | There isn't that much difference in performance between a bridge and a
- | router in terms of forwarding performance. The big difference is the
- | 100's of Kbytes of code to support the various stacks.
- +---------------
-
- You don't need 100's (or even 10's) of KB of code to route IP.
- Look at any of the several PC-based routers (KA9Q, PCroute, etc.).
-
- +---------------
- | Try running PC/TCP over a 64 Kbps link and you'll see what I mean. The
- | PC/TCP timers are not dynamic, and timeouts will occur.
- +---------------
-
- The fact that *one* ancient implementation of TCP is broken does not
- mean that all TCPs are broken. All modern TCPs have "dynamic" timers.
-
-
- -Rob
-
- -----
- Rob Warnock, MS-9U/510 rpw3@sgi.com
- Silicon Graphics, Inc. (415)390-1673
- 2011 N. Shoreline Blvd.
- Mountain View, CA 94043
-