Linux Ported to Cisco Routers, BSD chosen by router manufacturers

calc writes "Linux has now been ported to the Cisco 2500/3000/4000 routers. Click here for more details." This seems like a fairly logical (albeit not so useful hack). I mean, one would assume that cisco's have some wacky hardware in them... but then again, using standard tools to config them seems allright by me. And you could use your router as a web server if you were on crack *grin*. [Update by nik]: Not the first time a free operating system is used like this. For example, routers from Juniper run a modified FreeBSD, while Effnet base many of their products on NetBSD.

Comments

woo hoo!

[mrmud]

yippy skippy, now we can have cisco linux-distro' flame wars!

"MY cisco runs redhat!"
"oh yeah? my cisco runs slackware!"
"hah! amateurs! mine runs turbo!"

turnabout is fair play

[waldoj]

And you could use your router as a web server if you were on crack *grin*.

If we can use IP over DNS, http over routers seems reasonable.

I'm holding out for SSH over my toaster.

-Waldo

-------------------

Hmm, an unoptimized OS on expensive hardware, why?

[Hairy_Potter]

SO you take a great general purpose OS, Linux, and then stick it on expensive propietary hardware, a CISCO router, to replace the router-optimized OS already there.

Of course, a 486 running Freesco, a Linux derived firewall router, would probably have better performance and be far cheaper, but it's not as hackworthy.

Next week, a Linux router/firewall on a wristwatch, but you can't move your arm or your network will go down.

You know, I'm of two minds on this...

[trims]

I've seen alot of truely, ahhh, stunning, ports of Linux over the last couple of years. Wristwatches, toasters, etc. all seem to attract the attention and adoration of linux porters.

Now, what I'm seeing here is I think a conflict between two fundamental hacker tenants:

1. Admire difficult and elegant coding - hackers tend to look up to others who can pull of a hard job. Call it the "hack value" karma.
2. Use the right tool for the job - we also tend to stress utilitarianism and appropriateness.

What I guess I'm worried about is that I tend to see the over-emphasis on the first (especially amongst the younger of us), and the slighting of the second.

Yeah, there might be good, personal reasons for the above people to have ported Linux to Cisco. However, I'm not particularly happy that people tend to glorify these hackers and look down on the ones who might be (for instance) writing neat ASP scripts to talk to MS SQL servers from IIS.

Fundamentally, I'm worried that in our zeal to promote Linux and Free Software, we run into the "Round Peg, Square Hole" syndrome (or, the "If all you have is a hammer, everything starts to look like a nail" problem).

I guess what I'd like to see us as a community do is to place more value on doing the job right, which means using the appropriate tools (or, if there truely aren't good ones available, writing the correct thing), rather than spend time on things that in the end, are almost useless (other than perhaps educational use).

Feeling a bit crotchity today...
-Erik

My dreams have been answered

[Ralph Wiggam]

Every night, I kneel down at the foot of my bed and pray, "God bless Mommy, and Daddy, and can I please run Fortune on my Cisco router." Prayers do get answered.

-B

I'd like to see IOS on x86

[swb]

Personally I'd like to see IOS running on x86 hardware more than Linux on Cisco hardware. I'd love to get the functionality of IOS for ethernet routing on a box that didn't cost $20k. Yes, I know IOS is specially tuned to unique Cisco hardware, but for vanilla routing between ethernet interfaces (not frame-relay, not ATM, not OC-3) it'd be kind of nice to be able to run IOS on a 1 or 2U PC with 2-3 dual or quad port ethernet adapters.

I'd be interested to see what kind of performance you could get out of IOS on x86, anyway -- are we really buying cool hardware with expensive routers, or just the Cisco name?