Slashdot Mirror
Open Source Router on Par With Cisco, Users Say
Jane Walker writes "On a mission to avoid paying top dollar for Cisco routers, two users say Vyatta's Open Flexible Router is a viable alternative to the proprietary norm. Find out about the pluses and minor hassles involved in deploying this alternative." This probably won't surprise the users of (much lower end) networking gear like the famously hackable Linksys WRT54G, which — like a number of internally similar routers — can be reconfigured with one of several open-source firmwares to do things impossible with the hardware as delivered.
It is not surprising that low-end software routers can offer most things a proper Cisco router can. However when you need hgher speeds, a software router can not cut it. It is then when hardware routers show their strenght. A 100Mbps line usually does not require a hardware router. A 10Gbps line does.
Most ACs are not even worth the keystrokes to insult them. Be generically insulted by this and ignored otherwise.
Perhaps a link to the actual product would be in order?
Vyatta Open Flexible Router
What are we going to do tonight Brain?
Isn't this a way to avoid paying for the licensed software on Cisco equipment when it's sold second hand? (Not trolling or anything, I think it's ridiculous for Cisco to demand payment for software that's already been paid for once.)
IMHO, IANAL, TINLA, etc...
But then again for SMB - you don't need 100 MBit routing - many of your internal clients are slamming into your sub 10 Mbit internet connection anyway (that is probably further BW limited by the cable/phone company). Now for true enterprise - you really do need switching/routing at the ASIC level - real switching fabrics (not a glorified PCI bus) in the hardware etc. to handle the multiple GBit links, multiple OC12/OC48 connections to the world, etc.
This is where Cisco shines and I don't see "software only solutions" coming anywhere close
I have mod points and I am not afraid to use them
I rent a housemate cable internet, which we had terrible problems with before. The problem is a bad cable causing a load of bad packets to 'clog' the router. It is the only cable long enough I have though, but the DD-WRT firmware worked a treat. It does allow some cool features, such as increasing the number of IP connections from 512 (the default) to 4,096 which is ideal for p2p. You can also boost wireless power from the 28mW default to 250mW+. Anyway, my problem with it clogging up was solved by setting up a cron job within the router so that it reboots at 5am each day. Not ideal, but the solution works until he gets off his ass and finaly buys a wireless card.
This seems to be an entirely software router that just runs on a standard x86 machine.
Isn't half the point of buying a dedicated-hardware router that you get ASICs and whatnot that do the job faster than software?
Huh? What?
It's my hardware. If I buy a Cisco router via eBay, you're telling me I'm not allowed to put Linux on it if I can figure out how?
Summary: Works great, supposed problem sounds like it was a driver issue more than an application issue.
Reads like a well-placed article-vertisement.
The "as long as we're not switching half the US" comment are the one's I grow tired of. It's a well-wrapped insult.
I'm not saying Linux is the best tool for routing half the nation, but the comment points out some things that do prevent more linux adoption.
1. "free" is not as good as something I paid for
2. Don't fsck with the status quo.
I admin a company 100% cisco routers/firewalls and I know for a fact Linux can do what gets done.
I'm not going to tell the boss to "just" switch or evangelize too much because of the social/economic implications of doing so may impact my future. I like my employer, they like me, so when we need another router, it's a cisco. I am personally disappointed by this, but I think it explains why innovation takes -so- long to come to the data center. (at least in the U.S.)
Let's not forget that cisco can fire most of their software devs and use a linux-based router project if it ever got close to competing with some Cisco products. Does that qualify as innovation? I'd say no. It's not cheaper or better.
http://www.maxineudall.com/2010/02/should-economists-be-sued-for-malpractice.html
It is great that someone is out there tyring to put some preassure on Cisco however this company is not it. I think the average Linux installation with NAT is a bigger threat that this project.
PC hardware is a joke, slow backplanes, limitation on how many interfaces you can plug in. On the techspecs the number of interfaces types they use is well very very limited. Then reliability of PCs a joke compared to a Cisco box.
Where is this product used?
- Is this a bloated replacement for the US$20 taiwan PPPoE router you can buy? The taiwanese will beat it on TCO hands down on power consumption.
- Is this for the edge of the network to service downstream customers? Why part away from the thousands of installations which live, have predictable and very proven track record of something like a Cisco 7200VXR..
The article (Advertorial) is nicely skewed as making Cisco seem expensive. Go on ebay and look for Cisco routers with FE ports, you can find them for a few hundred dollars. Or try to compare this with 3550 which will provide 24 ports with Layer 3 functionality for way below the US$2000.
I am tired of Cisco killing products off when they feel like it.
They could go into the market of breathing new life into a product that is being cancelled by other vendors. Firebox II anyone?
Vyatta still need a strategy. period.
In or around 1999 I had a 1000 device network routing through a 133Mhz PC running Linux. The 133Mhz system practically thought is was sittle idle as it shuffled packets between three 100 megabit networks.
I'm not suprised at all that these Open Source solutions are on par with Cisco for many users. My only real concern would be support. At least back then (I have not dealt with them recently), Cisco had great support and would "own" network problem resolution in a way that made it worth paying their price.
Soccer Goal Plans
a small truck can replace a semi truck.... if you are moving small amounts of items.
actually I am happy to see you, however that is in fact a banana in my pocket.
Ok, I haven't looked at the performance numbers, but as a network administrator of a medium sized corporate network I could care less. Whether it be Cisco, Juniper, Nortel or 3Com the difference is in the support. When my wan interface or network interface dies at 2am I don't think anyone from the OSS community is going to have a parts depot within 4 hours to fix the problem. I also don't see 24x7 tech support phone numbers manned by volunteers anytime soon. Vendors don't make the money on the hardware, they make it on services and support. I love OSS, but Linux and OSS are not the magic pill for everything.
"The feature set was comparable to your standard Cisco router," Knox said. "They were offering translating, gateway capability, Samba file sharing, VLAN trunking to 11q ... it really looked like a corporate-level router," he said.
Since when do "corporate-level routers" offer samba file sharing? This seems like the LAST thing I would ever want to put on a router. The only thing I could possibly see Samba being useful for is downloading log/config files. But on a router that is kinda scary, SCP seems much more secure and just as useful.
Open source routing is definitely an option now though. Over 3 years ago the web hosting company I worked for swithced out their Cisco routers that couldn't handle the slighest DDoS attack for a couple AMD based Linux boxes that could easily handle wirespeed DDoS attacks with ease. Not to mention they were a fraction of the cost.
Open Source Time and Attendance, Job Costing a
I use Debian at home for a general purpose router and firewall and it is very flexible. There have been times when I've been tempted to deploy it as a small/medium business router in lieu of cisco but it's not just about the software, it's about the hardware as well. For a reliable system you need reliable parts... which are more expensive... preferable a cpu with a low thermal dissipation but still fast enough to handle the load, which is going to cost you money and either a RAID system or (ideally) a flash based storage system, which is going to cost money. You can build a system that will beat Cisco's cost/feature set easily. Building a system that can compete on cost/mtbf ... not so easy... and generally just not worth the effort.
The article referenced a "still servicable pc" ... which roughly translate into "a machine that we picked up from behind the receptionists desk and cleaned all the dust bunnies out of.... *shudders*
Strange - why would you expect companies to step down from decent DSL speeds to T1 rates.
When you need reliability, you have to give up on DSL/cable, because no DSL or cable provider is going to give you service guarantees. If a DSL/cable line doesn't provide it's advertised 2Mb/s download throughput, that's too bad; you might be able to negotiate your bill down. And if it goes down, it's going to be you reporting it to your ISP, not the other way around...
But a T1 circuit (generally) has both through throughput and uptime guarantees written into the contract. And automated monitoring of its performance, and fast notification that something's wrong, 24 hours a day. I've had DSL circuits be out for days; the longest a T1 circuit was down was 8 hours, and there were severe financial penalties proscribed for that event.
That's not to say a T1 circuit is perfect; we use a bonded pair of them to feed one site. One went down, due to an incident with a trencher. Verizon promptly fixed it... by moving the circuit to another pair that tested good in the cable. Guess which pair got used... If you guessed the pair that the second circuit lived on, you'd be right, and it went down. This went on for a day, alternating which circuit was up and down, until one of our people met the Verizon tech at the repair site. "You do know that there are TWO T1 circuits here, don't you?" "Oooops..."
If you're not paying at least $100s of dollars a month, you aren't getting any sort of guarantees.
...Steve
According to Cisco it is in fact your hardware, but it's still their software, and you can't sell it or transfer it.
This bit me a couple of years ago when I bought a 2611 on e-bay, and wanted to put the latest security fixes on it. Not being Cisco certified, I contacted Cisco to find out about getting or purchasing updates. I was told that my router was "gray market" and that I would need to buy another license for it.
"How much is that?", I asked.
"$1500.00."
"Holy shit!" (hangs up phone, lest they send the software gestapo.)
I had my lawyer review the license agreement that happened to be included in the box. He concurred. I was screwed if I wanted to use this router legimately.
I have the money to buy as much Cisco gear as I need, but this pissed me off so much that I haven't bought any since that day. Nor have any of my customers.
Cisco is not the only game in town, and they aren't the best any more. The people saying they are; either are not looking, or don't know anything else. Cisco just seems to be the only company with a product line extending from the very low to the very high-end.
Let me be clear- Linux _can_ offer almost all of the same services as Cisco- but not in a single unified way. You need to use Zebra for BGP and add in other software for the other protocols. And what happens if you disappear tomorrow. If your environment is Cisco then you can call any other Cisco admin and they can admin it immediately. Try that with a cobbled together Linux solution.
-sirket
Too bad they only support Sangoma serial cards.
http://blogs.sun.com/sbullen/entry/who_buys_cisco_ 3750_s