Quote:
Originally Posted by yash101
No. I am talking about router stability under HEAVY loads!
|
Deetman's point has more to do with all performance factors and the cost for that performance than a mere simple partial quantity.
For example:
You could get Zebra for Unix as a Cisco-like router built from a PC.
or
You could get a real Cisco router.
Now...for around $2,000 you could get a Cisco router suitable for a T1 PRI interface to the Internet (about 1.544Mbps) with the module containing the CSU/DSU.
A PC with all the parts to make this work is not a much better deal.
There is a strange point however: let's say you have cheap high bandwidth to use like say 150Mbps to the Internet (a real 150Mbps say on an OC3 fiber circuit). Keep in mind 'cheap' in this definition is thousands (in some cases tens of thousands of dollars) a month.
The suitable Cisco equipment to harness that might be quite expensive. However this is cheap transit. You don't really care so much that it's 99.99% up. You just want to use it.
So you slap some PCs on it with PCI Express cards and you accept that the performance might be touch and go for the major savings in price.
Back to FIRST:
FIRST is not really in the business of being an ISP or phone company.
They need it to work in a way that qualified (but volunteer) folks can handle it and not be so unusual that it becomes dependent on a single person.
If FIRST needs hardware for say wired Internet they are dividing what is likely between 1Mbps and 40Mbps link between 20-100 teams.
Used - but quality - gear from Cisco is available for cheap that can handle 10Mbps ports to the teams with a nice uplink speed back to the a single higher speed switch. Put the slower switches out near the teams in the pits. Run the uplinks from the various pit areas to a the higher speed switch. Then put whatever traffic control system that can be afforded at that point with either a router or...if the venue has it already...just plug it into the venue network.
Even if someone uses a PC as long as it can be supported (say Untangle or something like that) to rate limit and filter the result would be adequate - but still the Cisco hardware when it comes to hardening will outperform. It's possible with Untangle to pump 200k connections and several hundred megabit of traffic. Rate limiting (using tagged packets and VLANs) says you share what you have and it is unlikely you'll get a huge Internet connection with the field and streaming going on anyway.
That is more than enough for a scouting application. In point of fact: many businesses might be thrilled to have even that.
Keep in mind: it's better FIRST put that Cisco gear for that is purpose in the field than Untangle.
You loose your scouting app that stinks. You loose your field because a single power supply failed and that is bad.