There is one sensible argument against what I've said, but this isn't it. Try again and put some thought into it.
"Steven A. Ridder" wrote: > No one ever accused cisco of being a charity... > > -- > > RFC 1149 Compliant. > > ""Neal Rauhauser 402-301-9555"" wrote in message > [EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]... > > This one is just too juicy to pass up :-) > > > > The concise question is "Why would you use linux/freebsd or an > appliance > > based on > > them instead of purchasing a real router?" > > > > > > Cisco rules the backbone, they do enough on lan switching to get my vote > > their, and > > their Aironet radios are OK if you're abusing 802.11b by running it as a > > wireless > > internet provider but ... > > > > CISCO KNOWS SQUAT ABOUT ROUTER/WIRELESS INTEGRATION! > > > > > > There, I've said it. Detaled proof of concept is below: > > > > > > Lets consider a network I recently installed. I've got a tower on a > > building on a > > bluff that overlooks a valley where there is no DSL service. On the > opposite > > side of > > the valley I have another tower on a building on a bluff. The two towers > are > > separated > > by about three miles. Some sites in the valley can see one side, some can > > see the > > other, neither site would cover the whole valley properly. > > > > The building closest to my head end has an elevator shaft on top with > my > > small > > tower bolted to the side. There is room for a good sized 19" cabinet and > AC > > power. The > > building on the opposite side of the valley has a beautiful 50' tower on > top > > but the > > only facilties on the roof are a NEMA outdoor enclosure. The NEMA > enclosure > > can take a > > couple of radios and maybe a small hub but would not take any router > larger > > than a > > 1605. > > > > So, this one building has a backhaul link, it has a customer cell, it > > feeds the cell > > across the valley, and I have two other customers attached to this > location > > that > > received dedicated point to point links for a total of one cell and four > > point to point > > wireless links. There is also a wired link to our customers in the > building. > > > > From the layer three perspective this location has four /29s used for > point > > to point > > (why not /30s? you tell me, but ponder the wonder of VLANs and OSPF first > > :-] ), one > > /27 that is the customer cell, and a /29 for the wired customers. > > > > How would you build a network with six total subnets, one wireless cell, > > and four > > point to point links, using only Cisco equipment? This is the parts list > > with estimated > > pricing: > > > > Cisco 2620 $1500 > > Catalyst 1912 $300 > > Aironet AP352 $650 > > four x WGB352 $1800 > > total $4250 > > > > Now consider the alternative - a $400 PC, a $50 flash card, $200 for a > > linux based > > wireless capable OS from http://www.mikrotik.com, two PCI Aironet cards > > ($350) and a > > Dlink quad port ethernet card ($100). $1100 total > > > > I still needed the $650 AP and one external $450 WGB352 - $1100 for this. > > > > > > So, for $2200 I got the effect of purchasing $4250 of refurbished Cisco > > gear. > > > > > > Now lets look at the soft benefits of MikroTik vs IOS: > > > > Feature MikroTik IOS > > ssh yes with provider > image > > OSPF yes yes > > PPTP server yes not that I can > find > > PPPoE server yes yes, clumsy > > rate shape PPPoE client bit rate per user nope, just IOS > > traffic controls > > > > NAT yes yes > > processor AMD 1 gig 40 MHz PPC > > memory 256 meg max out at 64 meg > > firewall ipchains(cool) clumsy access > lists > > user interface killer CLI clumsy CLI > > annual support $500 or so including aironet about 3X MT costs > > > > > > Over a three year period the MikroTik box is going to cost me about one > > fourth of what > > I'd pay for a minimal Cisco solution and the performance of the MT is on > par > > with a > > 7206 /w an NPE300. > > > > > > Now there are a lot of reasons to prefer Cisco in the backbone over > > MikroTik, but I'm > > not going to say anything :-) You'll just have to download the free eval > of > > MikroTik > > and make it work with your Cisco lab if you want to know ... > > > > > > > > > > > > > I always see people asking for Linux/Unix sims for BGP > > > or just to simulate a router in General. I for the life of me can't > > > figure out why a Linux router could be better than a 2501 and > > > it would cost me more to build a Linux box. I see the same with Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7&i=46142&t=46142 -------------------------------------------------- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
