At 11:16 AM 3/25/97, Greg Woods wrote:
>Aside from the technology being new and the problems associated with
>that, I have my doubts that an Ultra will really be able to handle a
>full 155 megabits plus do all the firewall stuff (but I have not
>personally tried it). An ATM interface might be overkill; FDDI or even
>switched 10Mbps Ethernet might be enough.
Perhaps overkill in more ways than one. Won't this require the Ultra to
reassemble the cells to packets, perform it's firewall functions and
then segment back to cells. Are not the current application level firewalls
basically frame based vs cell based? My current information has a Sparc5
being able to pump out about 50-55Mb via ATM with one interface before the
CPU was saturated with the SAR function since this was not being done with a
pipelined ATM interface card, if such cards yet exist. With a firewall,
you'll have double that function and even with a faster Ultra, what do you
anticipate the throughput to be?
The first question is, does just throwing some ATM interface on a frame based
firewall buy you anything? or does it penalize your performance?
Second, does this really give you what your looking for? perhaps an ATM
firewall
thing might need to understand protocols that are somewhat different than
what is
accustom with a more standard firewall, i.e. classic ip,...
Not an answer, just more questions that I'd like to know the answers to ...
chris
Follow-Ups:
|
|
