Re: MD5 is slow

[Tom Beecher via NANOG <nanog () lists nanog org>]

> I don't know what's common right this minute (as I haven't been shopping
> for routers for a bit), but for example, all the Juniper MXes outside of
> the MX80 have been competent-to-beefy Intel CPUs.  I don't think the
> routers likely to be running a lot of BGP are going to be using some
> low-end CPU.


Anything reasonably newer on MX has Haswell or Icy Lakes in them, and
multicore. But even that Ford Model T of an MX80 wouldn't flinch at MD5
operations.

On Wed, Sep 10, 2025 at 9:33 AM Chris Adams via NANOG <nanog () lists nanog org>
wrote:

> Once upon a time, nanog () immibis com <nanog () immibis com> said:
> > A hash is also way faster than 5ms to compute. I suggest doing your own
> benchmark. Run it on an old raspberry pi or one of Amazon's cheapest ARM
> servers to be sure it's comparable to typical router CPU hardware.
>
> I don't know what's common right this minute (as I haven't been shopping
> for routers for a bit), but for example, all the Juniper MXes outside of
> the MX80 have been competent-to-beefy Intel CPUs.  I don't think the
> routers likely to be running a lot of BGP are going to be using some
> low-end CPU.
> --
> Chris Adams <cma () cmadams net>
> _______________________________________________
> NANOG mailing list
>
> https://lists.nanog.org/archives/list/nanog () lists nanog org/message/RI46RBUWSGZU7CWSCOPIB6SQZNWIIJYE/
_______________________________________________
NANOG mailing list 
https://lists.nanog.org/archives/list/nanog () lists nanog org/message/BE3UNLEPJKFSQCIEDAERG4DNEVVY47UW/