> He asked for the best way to do it. IMHO that is the best way.
Okay. Fair nuff.
> I never said it was. Notice I put the parens *after* the PM3. The PM3 is a
> Term server.
Okay.
> Why not an IRX? Tell me, when are you pushing the router too hard?
What do you mean? Are you saying you dont like the IRX's?
> How many full or partial views can you take, combined with how many
> filters/what type can you have, combines with how much data can you be
> pushing, before you experience performance degredation?
Dunno.
> And what is your upgrade path if you even knew the answer, not that you
> ever could hope to because Livingston cannot provide meaningful processor
> resource utilization statistics? Cisco, Bay, etc., etc.
That is a point I had mentioned before about 1 year ago. I dont sell too
many IRX's. I just thought Id try to be loyal.
>
> It has been explained to me more than once that because of the way in
> which ComOS has been written, processor statistics would be meaningless. I
> understand, and accept this. However, I consider this a serious design
> flaw when dealing with resource-intesive routing protocols. Given this
> basic inability, I wouldn't recommend running a Livingston product as a
> gateway router, especially when running BGP and/or OSPF.
>
> And before folks jump in and say "Well, it works great on *my* network," I
> would ask the same question again: How will you know when you are pushing
> it too hard?
Look for smoke and weird buzzing sounds (also coming from the ears of my
customers.) Point taken.
~*-,._.,-*~'`^`'~*-,._.,-*~'`^`'~*-,._.,-*~'`^`'~*-,._.,-*~'`^`'~*-,._.,-*~
Jake Messinger 713-772-6690 jake@ams.com
Advanced Medical Systems, Inc. jake@uh.edu
8300 Bissonnet #400
Houston, Texas 77074 http://www.ams.com/~jake
~*-,._.,-*~'`^`'~*-,._.,-*~'`^`'~*-,._.,-*~'`^`'~*-,._.,-*~'`^`'~*-,._.,-*~