Subject: Re: bitching about ciscos (Was Re: Rolling in IPv6 code into -current)
To: Peter Galbavy <firstname.lastname@example.org>
From: Neil J. McRae <email@example.com>
Date: 04/28/1996 17:29:06
On Sun, 28 Apr 1996 10:17:56 +0100 (BST)
Peter Galbavy <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote:
> I haven't yet had time to look at the propsals on the table for the next
> NANOG, but people tell me that it involves yet another round of magic
> restrictions to fix the problems *caused* by the massive presence of
> Cisco. "Apparently" (in quote, cause we all knew this, insteresting how
> others are only now finding out) their CPUs cannot cope with the route
> flap going on out there, so they are going to fix the problem by providing
> facilities to drop prefixes base on some inversely exponential metric to
> do with the prefix length.
> sigh. Cisco are proud to have 80% of the Internet infrastructure they say.
> Can they fix their intentionally under powered systems to actully allow
> the world to keep working ? No. sigh.
> I am glad we use NetBSD boxes for routers. I can even put up with the
> instabilities of gated.
Long overdue and very well said Peter.
Neil J. McRae. DNS: Domino Network Services
email@example.com NetBSD/sparc: 100% SpF (Solaris protection Factor)
Free the daemon in your computer!