Slashdot Mirror
Open-Source Router to Take on Cisco?
ickypick writes to tell us that CNN is running an article about the emergence of an OpenSource Router product, currently in Beta, that targets mid-size enterprise customers for about one-fifth the cost of current enterprise networking giants' hardware. From the article: "The machine runs on two Intel chips, but far more noteworthy is its software, known as XORP, or extensible open router platform. The versatile open-source application can direct data traffic for a giant corporation as easily as it can manage a home Wi-Fi network." The current release is available for download from Vyatta's web site."
Seems like everything is Open Source now. (No, I am not complaining, i am backing it)
.... You name it.
We have Routers, Firewalls, IDS/IPS's, OS's, Word Processors, Spreadsheets, Presenting software. Hell. I would love to see an experiment where an entire corporate network was made, entirely of Open Source products (except for the hardware of course). From Routers to firewalls to
That would be an interesting, and totally free network.
Also very complicated
For a router, its mostly in the hardware, if it can keep up with real-life data rates.
Software is secondary..
---- Booth was a patriot ----
Make money? This better be good hardware running good software, because otherwise people are just going to say "fsck it, nobody was ever fired for buying Cisco". Why? Because Cisco actually works.
Yes, OSS community, your adversary actually works this time. Beware.
So who do you call when the thing breaks?
With Cisco, I call the rep, and they have a replacement device in our datacenter within the hour, and we load up the config and get it fixed.
Doubt you'll get that kind of service here, and that's what you pay for with Cisco.
Slashdot still doesnâ(TM)t support Unicode after it was added to the HTML standard in 1997.
This is all assuming I'm willing to go unsupported, of course.
1) By far the most important is what kind of interfaces can I get for it. Of course I can get ethernet but what about T1, DSL, SONET, etc. If all this does is route packets over ethernet, which I then need to plug in to another router to get to my WAN, that's not so useful. I'd say over 90% of the Cisco routers I see in business are for WAN connections. If you are going to have to buy those anyhow, then what's the point?
2) What kind of load can it handle? Having something that can do a gig is all well and good, but can it still do a gig with 20,000 clients generating 50,000+ connections? That's where many budget routers and firewalls fall flat. They do everything in software so they can do the traffic no problem, but it's the concurrency that kills them.
3) Does it support layer-3 switching? That's where you in effect route the first packet of a flow and switch the rest. Leads to much lower impact on the router, and lower pings. Can't do it going from one media to another, but for internal routing it's the way to go.
This is, as mentioned, not considering support. I mean it's all well and good to slap some NICs in a system, load an OS that can route traffic, and call it a router/firewall/whatever, but it's something else entirely to see that survive under a real load. We see that all the time on campus when we test new potential devices. They promise gig throughput, something I have no doubt they deliver, and less than we use, but they instantly crash when exposed to our network. Why? Well we have like 30,000-40,000 comptuers or so that generate hundreds of thousands of concurrent connections. They just aren't equipped to process that kind of load and they stop passing traffic. The Ciscos, however, that compose the entire core, edge, and distribution parts of the network, operate without problems.
Never underestimate the power of Spin, especially when the general public has no interest in being informed about such complex subjects as network security (and lacks wisdom enough to decide that the only two reasonable courses of action are A. Learn about the subject or B. Shut the fuck up).
If the backdoors are for law enforcement purposes, why, then Cisco is simply being a Patriotic Corporate Citizen and Doing Their Part to help Stop Internet Crime etc etc. If this became a big controversy, all it would take is for one politician or one media outlet to talk even more about how wiretapping/remote logging ability is For Your Own Good and for the sole purpose of Stopping Al-Queda or whomever the convenient bogeyman of the day may be (because Oceania has always been at war with Eastasia). Rest assured that there will be such a device/tactic handy to drown out any kind of reasonable debate about the subject, should it ever become a serious issue.
The belief that a company which implements poor practices--such as undisclosed, intentional security hazards like backdoors--can "kiss their ass good bye" presupposes a market that consists entirely of informed, educated buyers who understand all security ramifications of their buying decisions (and such "features" that come with the package) and who always look after their own interests. Furthermore it assumes that they have enough sense to disregard any and all statements (on principle alone, as such claims have zero credibility) from any third parties who claim to know what is best for them, if only their particular set of restrictions were implemented. You will find that this last item is becoming lost upon us, especially in the USA.
I find this presupposition to be entirely unrealistic, and for that reason open-source alternatives can only possibly be a good thing, even if only because they give the established solutions such as those offered by Cisco a reason to avoid growing complacent.
It is a miracle that curiosity survives formal education. - Einstein
Except that the 'uninformed masses' are not ciscos main market.. we arent talking about twinkees here... ( and i know of one case where a bakery chain went down hard, due to one mistake.. the 'general public' understood what happened, and the place was out of business in 6 months, after nearly 100 years of being in the business )
Most of Cisco's market undersands the technology and security ramifications, and i think they would drop cisco in a heartbeat if this were to happen. Or at least i would hope they would...
---- Booth was a patriot ----
To a point, I agree with you. I like hardware; it just works. Flash back to several years ago when WinModems were first introduced... Remember what a disaster they were, especially for anyone who didn't fit the anticipated M$-using profile? They were cheaper yes, but also lower quality, more proprietary, and OS-dependent when compared to hardware modems. It was not very long until anyone buying a modem had to shop around very carefully to avoid being stuck with this type of shit. Because I do not use any Microsoft software (but they make decent mice), this was my experience before broadband became available in my area.
I don't want to see this happen to routers. With the reliability/availability that is usually demanded of a router, and the fact that routers are typically only implemented by either a knowledgable user or a hired technician, I do not anticipate this will actually be a problem.
However, I have encountered your "oh well they usually learn" arrogance before. Hell, from time to time I might display this myself. You know, the idea that anyone who disagrees with you or who wants to use a different solution for their needs than what you would use could only be suffering from a lack of education and must not have any valid point. It's just a dismissal. Dismissal is a favorite tactic of otherwise logical, composed people who do not care to truly examine a particular issue and are not honest about this unwillingness upfront.
The main question your post raises for me is that there is an unstated assumption there that Cisco is absolutely dominating this market (which I do not dispute) and is therefore THE sensible choice (this is the part I find questionable). Support contracts, features, performance, blah blah blah... To me these are not the central issue because you can get your desired balance of these by shopping around. So, just explain this one thing to me - how is a majority Cisco marketshare good for anyone other than Cisco?
FYI, I agree that software routers cannot match the raw performance of dedicated specialty hardware, but I also agree that fire is hot and liquid water is wet. I get the impression that neither Xorp nor any other software router is going to be marketed to Fortune 100 companies in an attempt to directly compete with Cisco, but rather is intended for small to medium sized networks. How many mom-n-pop setups and local businesses ever turn into multimillion dollar enterprises? For this reason I do not consider the "they all migrate one day" statement to be the showstopper that you seem to believe it is.
It is a miracle that curiosity survives formal education. - Einstein