RE: draft-morrow-filter-caps-00 comments

["Christopher L. Morrow" <christopher.morrow@mci.com>]

On Mon, 7 Mar 2005, Barry Raveendran Greene wrote:

>
>
>
> > The performace degradation I was aiming at was: "console
> > access" or "management access" limitations... a 7206 can
> > filter (sort of) 5kpps aimed at the device once you put on
> > recieve-path acls, but it won't be very happy about that
> > filtering and device CPU will shoot to 99% :( That's
> > unacceptable. Filtering "TO THE DEVICE" should have no impact
> > on device CPU/management/console...
>
> Which laws of phyisic are you looking for? If all you have is a CPU to

i like the laws that apply in my world :) Seriosuly though, I do
understand that software based systems will be a problem.

> process packets, that CPU cycles will be spent on any packet - whether it is
> a data plane packet of a management/control plane packet. So how do you
> expect complainance with "no impact on device CPU/manage/concole" when all
> you have is a CPU once you saturate the cycles, you have to sacrifices
> something. If you set the time slices to allow the console to always have a
> slice, then you are taking away time slices from something else in the CPU
> processing queue (forwarding, routing protocols, management, etc.).
>

I also agree that this requires more thought :)