| Google routers Does that mean my Youtube videos are going to get stuck in the dreaded buffering state even more so than now ?
On a serious note, does Google even have the talent to pull this off? Building routers of the caliber of Juniper and Cisco isn't an overnight or easy task.
--
"This is a bus. You know how big a bus is?" |
|
|
|
 HallPremium,MVM
join:2000-04-28
Dayton, OH
kudos:1 | said by NetAdmin1: On a serious note, does Google even have the talent to pull this off? Don't be surprised if the basis for this rumor comes from people leaving Cisco or Juniper or other router manufacturers and being hired by Google. |
|
 knightmbEverybody Lies
join:2003-12-01
Franklin, TN | reply to NetAdmin1
said by NetAdmin1:Does that mean my Youtube videos are going to get stuck in the dreaded buffering state even more so than now ? On a serious note, does Google even have the talent to pull this off? Building routers of the caliber of Juniper and Cisco isn't an overnight or easy task. The most expensive Cisco routers are often outdone by their open source counterparts on both price and hardware, so yeah, I think Google would smoke them in this area.
I can grab an old PC that runs about 233 MHz with about 64 MB of RAM, a few cheap NIC cards, load up some open source software and it does more, faster, than the thousand dollar counterparts.
From my own personal experience of course, I wouldn't pay that much for Cisco hardware when old hardware given a new life is so cheap and without the limitations/price. 
--
Fight NebuAD and the like:
Click Here to pollute their data |
|
 jhboricuaExMod 2000-01
join:2000-06-06
Minneapolis, MN
2 edits | reply to NetAdmin1
There are some high quality router software product based out of Linux at its core such as Vyatta which, when tested by The Tolly Group, already beats Cisco's 7204VXR and 2821ISR units in routing performance using commodity hardware.
Since it is based Open Source software, there's nothing stopping Google from doing something similar.
--
"Two things are infinite: the universe and human stupidity; and I'm not sure about the the universe." - Albert Einstein
Jose A. Hernandez * System Admin * MPLS, Minnesota, USA * |
|
 Frankis chillingPremium
join:2000-11-03
somewhere
2 edits | reply to knightmb
said by knightmb:said by NetAdmin1:Does that mean my Youtube videos are going to get stuck in the dreaded buffering state even more so than now ? On a serious note, does Google even have the talent to pull this off? Building routers of the caliber of Juniper and Cisco isn't an overnight or easy task. The most expensive Cisco routers are often outdone by their open source counterparts on both price and hardware, so yeah, I think Google would smoke them in this area. I can grab an old PC that runs about 233 MHz with about 64 MB of RAM, a few cheap NIC cards, load up some open source software and it does more, faster, than the thousand dollar counterparts. From my own personal experience of course, I wouldn't pay that much for Cisco hardware when old hardware given a new life is so cheap and without the limitations/price. I dont know, I really cant picture a standard atx pc being capable of handling routing and switching for multiple oc-48s. 
--
At first I thought everyone on the highway was drunk but then I realized I was driving in Florida  |
|
 tubbynetreminds me of the danse russePremium,MVM
join:2008-01-16
Chandler, AZ | said by Frank:I dont know, I really cant picture a standard atx pc being capable of handling routing and switching for multiple oc-48s. qft!
many people want to hype the "open source" product lines. while i agree that on the consumer level, a cisco router is very overkill (though i have a 2811 at home) and is beyond the pricing ability of many people.
however, don't for one second think that google (in their core backbone) is using anything less than a juniper erx (which i believe is equivalent to a cisco gsr/asr). these routers *cannot* be beaten by a simple pc or even server class hardware.
moreover, the reason those cisco or juniper devices are expensive is the modularity. as Frank  pointed out, i'd be curious to see multiple sonet links be routed through a typical x86 architecture. hell, i'd like to see the price point of a sonet card capable of oc-48 that could be slapped inside anything with x86 architecture.
q. |
|
| reply to jhboricua
said by jhboricua:There are some high quality router software product based out of Linux at its core such as Vyatta which, when tested by The Tolly Group, already beats Cisco's 72xx and 28xx units in routing performance using commodity hardware. Problem is that Google isn't using routers comparable to 7200 series Ciscos, they are using M120 class routers and up for their data centers. And just as discussed on NANOG, it turns out that can't build an open source, OTS hardware based router that can handle multiple 10Gbps circuits with the assorted mixture OC48+ circuits.
You might be able to get a couple of GigE interfaces in a fast box, but then you are pretty limited as to where you can deploy them. Edge routing, probably, but core or border router, probably not.
--
"This is a bus. You know how big a bus is?" |
|
jhboricuaExMod 2000-01
join:2000-06-06
Minneapolis, MN
1 edit | said by NetAdmin1:Problem is that Google isn't using routers comparable to 7200 series Ciscos, they are using M120 class routers and up for their data centers. And just as discussed on NANOG, it turns out that can't build an open source, OTS hardware based router that can handle multiple 10Gbps circuits with the assorted mixture OC48+ circuits. Agreed, however that's more of a niche market. I was merely commenting on the assertion that "building routers of the caliber of Juniper and Cisco isn't an overnight or easy task." Router appliances such as Vyatta provides features, performance, flexibility and price for the majority of businesses out there that Cisco and Juniper can't match. |
|
KearnstdElf WizardPremium
join:2002-01-22
Mullica Hill, NJ | reply to NetAdmin1
however with how trusted info from the net is, all this could really be is Google making their own firmware for routers allowing them to use current hardware but have more control with their own firmware
--
[65 Arcanist]Filan(High Elf) Zone: Broadband Reports |
|
 DarkLogixPremium
join:2008-10-23
Baytown, TX
kudos:3
1 edit | reply to jhboricua
Find some open source that can beat a CRS1 then open source might have a shot
I just don't see any major business using open source for a major router
and I'm quite happy with my 3745 w/NME-16ES-1G for my home |
|
 bkymoof moofPremium
join:2002-07-05
Austin, TX | reply to tubbynet
said by tubbynet:moreover, the reason those cisco or juniper devices are expensive is the modularity. The reason they are expensive is because of the name and their ability to sit and spin gold for providers, it's not the hardware. Cisco is a software company, so is Google. You tell me which one you think is better. |
|
 N3OGHYo Soy Col. "Bat" GuanoPremium
join:2003-11-11
Philly burbs
kudos:1 | reply to tubbynet
OK, you just blew me out of the water with that one.
erx
gsr/asr
multiple sonet links
oc-48
Just tell me one thing. IS THE FLUX CAPACITOR FLUXING???
--
Petty people are disproportionably corrupted by petty power… |
|
tubbynetreminds me of the danse russePremium,MVM
join:2008-01-16
Chandler, AZ | reply to bky
said by bky:The reason they are expensive is because of the name and their ability to sit and spin gold for providers, it's not the hardware. Cisco is a software company, so is Google. You tell me which one you think is better. no - cisco is *not* just a software designer. no other provider (outside of juniper) offer such flexibility and modularity in devices.
having toured the r&d department for some of the routing and switching fabric, i've seen what they do to test and retest their hardware between shock, rf, dust, etc. they stand behind their repuatation and what they make is *quality* gear.
i've seen their gear take heat, dust, shock, and years of sitting in a wall passing packets. the reason they make their gear expensive because they stand behind and make sure that their gear is as good as possible for the end customer.
(a) i'd love to see any x86 pc sit in a rack for years and just pass packets without failure.
(b) what would be the cost of your x86 box if it *had* the ability to handle high speed sonet links? can youx x86 pc handle 96 ports of gig poe copper, an fwsm firewall module, and a wism for wireless control? my cisco 6509 can and not even even blink. |
|
tubbynetreminds me of the danse russePremium,MVM
join:2008-01-16
Chandler, AZ
1 edit | reply to N3OGH
said by N3OGH:Just tell me one thing. IS THE FLUX CAPACITOR FLUXING??? only on the weekends. it brings down the network and people complain if they can't get their e-mail or their pr0n while at work.
q. |
|
DarkLogixPremium
join:2008-10-23
Baytown, TX
kudos:3 | reply to bky
Cisco easy
and cisco is more than a software company the hardware isn't some generic just its purpose built
and if you compair cisco to a software router with heavy testing you'll see butI doubt you could afford a 3845 or a 7613 for that matter
ya a lot of prople will come around and say hay this free software can beat such and such but if put to a real test then its not as likely as you think
and just try finding a PC that can even handle an OC-48 let alone a OC-768 and even less the 100Gbit fiber thats coming
it just woun't be able to so the software routers can't compete with the likes of the 7613 or the CRS-1 |
|
tubbynetreminds me of the danse russePremium,MVM
join:2008-01-16
Chandler, AZ | reply to jhboricua
said by jhboricua:Router appliances such as Vyatta provides features, performance, flexibility and price for the majority of businesses out there that Cisco and Juniper can't match. but how long did it take to create the vyatta software?
i know that certainly *wasn't* overnight.
you are also assuming that google will just "rebrand" what has already been done. there are certainly examples out there, but what if they want to use "the google" from the ground up?
q. |
|
bkymoof moofPremium
join:2002-07-05
Austin, TX | reply to tubbynet
Cisco is primarily a software company, NOT a hardware company. Ask any Cisco employee or reseller how much money they profit from selling the hardware alone. Cisco makes money from contracts (read SMARTnet) and software licensing. You are telling me that $60K justifies the manufacturing costs for a Cisco ASA 5550 with SSL VPN capabilities or $30K for a 6500 8-port gigabit switch module. If you really believe that you're smoking bad crack.
It's ALL marketing. Cisco has the staple because they got there first. While many companies don't have the cash or power to enter that arena, Google could if they wanted. The hardware could be (and is) made by anyone and re-branded. In fact, Cisco uses ghost manufacturers to produce most (if not all) of the gear they sell anyway. |
|
tubbynetreminds me of the danse russePremium,MVM
join:2008-01-16
Chandler, AZ | said by bky:Ask any Cisco employee or reseller i am
said by bky:You are telling me that $60K justifies the manufacturing costs for a Cisco ASA 5550 with SSL VPN capabilities or $30K for a 6500 8-port gigabit switch module have you *seen* the testing that goes into one of those things? do you know the man-hours of r&d that go into one of those devices? sure, they do offer support in smartnet. sure, it is expensive to maintain said service contracts. have you ever had to use a smartnet for hardware repairs? i've had a *generic* hardware support contract give me a device the next day to replace my broken one. i'm sorry, if i (or any of my customers) are paying for this support, then i will take it.
how is this any different than a provider charging you thousdand plus per month for a t1 line? it goes for support, overhead, etc.
said by bky:It's ALL marketing. so is everything else. cisco is no different.
said by bky:Cisco has the staple because they got there first and you don't think that it is because that they make good quality devices? what about kay-pro computers, or commodore? they were here first too, but have they survived? they either died or were bought out.
said by bky:In fact, Cisco uses ghost manufacturers to produce most (if not all) of the gear they sell anyway they may contract out for the actual assembly once the design is done, but what do you think about the r&d and design?
who actually manufactures their own stuff anymore? once the design is setup, contract out your specs and go.
said by bky:If you really believe that you're smoking bad crack nah, i make my own. higher quality
q. |
|
jhboricuaExMod 2000-01
join:2000-06-06
Minneapolis, MN | reply to tubbynet
said by tubbynet:but how long did it take to create the vyatta software? i know that certainly *wasn't* overnight. Didn't imply otherwise anywhere on my post.
said by tubbynet:you are also assuming that google will just "rebrand" what has already been done. there are certainly examples out there, but what if they want to use "the google" from the ground up? Actually, I never said anything about rebranding, that's your own assumption. I merely pointed to the fact that there is plenty of OSS code that Google can use to come up with their own router OS. They have done plenty of that in the past.
--
"Two things are infinite: the universe and human stupidity; and I'm not sure about the the universe." - Albert Einstein
Jose A. Hernandez * System Admin * MPLS, Minnesota, USA * |
|
jhboricuaExMod 2000-01
join:2000-06-06
Minneapolis, MN
1 edit | reply to DarkLogix
said by DarkLogix:Cisco easy and cisco is more than a software company the hardware isn't some generic just its purpose built If you look at the 2 studies by the Tolly Group I linked you'll see that the commodity hardware used on the Vyatta platform was faster routing packets, had more capacity for holding BGP routes and was faster converging them by a substantial margin compared to the Cisco hardware it ran against. Cisco would like you to believe that purpose built hardware is better in all scenarios but that's a lie. It sure give's them some hefty profit margins from those who believe that crap.
said by DarkLogix:and if you compair cisco to a software router with heavy testing you'll see butI doubt you could afford a 3845 or a 7613 for that matter ya a lot of prople will come around and say hay this free software can beat such and such but if put to a real test then its not as likely as you think That's exactly what Tolly did, and their results indicate otherwise. A little over $7k+ Vyatta platform soundly out-performing an over 30k+ Cisco router. You should at least backup your statements.
said by DarkLogix:and just try finding a PC that can even handle an OC-48 let alone a OC-768 and even less the 100Gbit fiber thats coming it just woun't be able to so the software routers can't compete with the likes of the 7613 or the CRS-1 Where is this assumption that a PC based router is not able to handle a OC48 coming from? Just curious, honestly, since I've seen this claim repeated several times on this thread. I can see how the old PCI-X bus could limit a server PC hardware-wise but with the bandwidth available on the PCIe bus, and 10G cards readily available, what's the limiting factor? Can you cite any studies that have been made or is this just another assumption on your part? |
|
