This was actually posted to firewalls (but Brent started it :-)
> I buy routers to route packets (or bridge them in some cases). I would
> just a soon not have them using cpu cycles to do other stuff. I
> definitely want it to use the cycles to process the filters as fast as
> possible so that doesn't delay routing the packets. The router shouldn't
> be spending its time playing local ticker for NTP. Using NTP to set the
> clock of the router is probably ok, but beyond that is freeping
> creaturism in my opinion.
>
> /dan
I was actually gratified to see Paul speak up on this topic.
I hope mine is the last non-firewalls post about NTP from routers ;-)
I have said (still believe) routers should not spend resources on frivolous
things like a GUI (or menues even). But time is an essential service.
Routers are often the only devices carefully designed to have a presence
on every subnet that needs something like reliable time.
The routers can be configured to broadcast only on links where it makes sense.
Do I detect just a hint of the anti-router sentiment that surfaces occasionally
on Firewalls? Remember, the features of routers sometimes fit your needs best.
The features of application hosts sometimes fit your needs best.
Good designs often require the right combination of both.
True for firewall design and many other aspects of networking.
(See how I fit firewall design back into the wandering thread :-)
Peace.
-- John
|
|
