 
Matt
Gone playing Dragon Age Origins
Premium
join:2003-07-20
Jamestown, NC |  Juniper Was Smart
| |
|
HarveyTheRabbit
@windstream.net | Cisco Source?? I find it odd that a source of the rumor is coming from Cisco. Being that Google is a Cisco Free Network. | |
|
 | 
danny9894
Student
join:2004-03-05
Minneapolis, MN
1 edit | Re: Cisco Source?? If this is true how long until Juniper is bought out by Cisco hehe. I welcome a Google router however it is gonna have to do a lot to get me to swtich from my beloved IOS.
*PS* What prodcut are they gonna make next a toaster? | |
|
| 
Hall
Premium,MVM
join:2000-04-28
Dayton, OH | said by HarveyTheRabbit :
I find it odd that a source of the rumor is coming from Cisco. See my post below... | |
|
NetAdmin
CCNA
join:2008-05-22
|  Google routers
On a serious note, does Google even have the talent to pull this off? Building routers of the caliber of Juniper and Cisco isn't an overnight or easy task.
--
"This is a bus. You know how big a bus is?" | |
|
| |
| 
knightmb
Everybody Lies
join:2003-12-01
Franklin, TN
 ·AT&T DSL Service
| said by NetAdmin  :Does that mean my Youtube videos are going to get stuck in the dreaded buffering state even more so than now ? On a serious note, does Google even have the talent to pull this off? Building routers of the caliber of Juniper and Cisco isn't an overnight or easy task. The most expensive Cisco routers are often outdone by their open source counterparts on both price and hardware, so yeah, I think Google would smoke them in this area.
I can grab an old PC that runs about 233 MHz with about 64 MB of RAM, a few cheap NIC cards, load up some open source software and it does more, faster, than the thousand dollar counterparts.
From my own personal experience of course, I wouldn't pay that much for Cisco hardware when old hardware given a new life is so cheap and without the limitations/price. 
--
Fight NebuAD and the like:
Click Here to pollute their data | |
|
| | 
Frank
is chilling
Premium
join:2000-11-03
somewhere
 ·Verizon FIOS
2 edits | Re: Google routers said by knightmb :said by NetAdmin :Does that mean my Youtube videos are going to get stuck in the dreaded buffering state even more so than now ? On a serious note, does Google even have the talent to pull this off? Building routers of the caliber of Juniper and Cisco isn't an overnight or easy task. The most expensive Cisco routers are often outdone by their open source counterparts on both price and hardware, so yeah, I think Google would smoke them in this area. I can grab an old PC that runs about 233 MHz with about 64 MB of RAM, a few cheap NIC cards, load up some open source software and it does more, faster, than the thousand dollar counterparts. From my own personal experience of course, I wouldn't pay that much for Cisco hardware when old hardware given a new life is so cheap and without the limitations/price. I dont know, I really cant picture a standard atx pc being capable of handling routing and switching for multiple oc-48s. 
--
At first I thought everyone on the highway was drunk but then I realized I was driving in Florida  | |
|
| | | |
| | | | 
bky
moof moof
Premium
join:2002-07-05
Austin, TX
| Re: Google routers said by tubbynet :moreover, the reason those cisco or juniper devices are expensive is the modularity. The reason they are expensive is because of the name and their ability to sit and spin gold for providers, it's not the hardware. Cisco is a software company, so is Google. You tell me which one you think is better. | |
|
| | | | | 
tubbynet
reminds me of the danse russe
Premium
join:2008-01-16
Chandler, AZ
 ·Cox HSI
 ·Callcentric
 ·Sprint Mobile Broa..
·FrontierNet Intern..
| Re: Google routers said by bky :The reason they are expensive is because of the name and their ability to sit and spin gold for providers, it's not the hardware. Cisco is a software company, so is Google. You tell me which one you think is better. no - cisco is *not* just a software designer. no other provider (outside of juniper) offer such flexibility and modularity in devices.
having toured the r&d department for some of the routing and switching fabric, i've seen what they do to test and retest their hardware between shock, rf, dust, etc. they stand behind their repuatation and what they make is *quality* gear.
i've seen their gear take heat, dust, shock, and years of sitting in a wall passing packets. the reason they make their gear expensive because they stand behind and make sure that their gear is as good as possible for the end customer.
(a) i'd love to see any x86 pc sit in a rack for years and just pass packets without failure.
(b) what would be the cost of your x86 box if it *had* the ability to handle high speed sonet links? can youx x86 pc handle 96 ports of gig poe copper, an fwsm firewall module, and a wism for wireless control? my cisco 6509 can and not even even blink. | |
|
| | | | | |
bky
moof moof
Premium
join:2002-07-05
Austin, TX
| Re: Google routers Cisco is primarily a software company, NOT a hardware company. Ask any Cisco employee or reseller how much money they profit from selling the hardware alone. Cisco makes money from contracts (read SMARTnet) and software licensing. You are telling me that $60K justifies the manufacturing costs for a Cisco ASA 5550 with SSL VPN capabilities or $30K for a 6500 8-port gigabit switch module. If you really believe that you're smoking bad crack.
It's ALL marketing. Cisco has the staple because they got there first. While many companies don't have the cash or power to enter that arena, Google could if they wanted. The hardware could be (and is) made by anyone and re-branded. In fact, Cisco uses ghost manufacturers to produce most (if not all) of the gear they sell anyway. | |
|
| | | | | | |
tubbynet
reminds me of the danse russe
Premium
join:2008-01-16
Chandler, AZ
·Cox HSI
·Callcentric
·Sprint Mobile Broa..
·FrontierNet Intern..
| Re: Google routers said by bky :Ask any Cisco employee or reseller i am
said by bky :You are telling me that $60K justifies the manufacturing costs for a Cisco ASA 5550 with SSL VPN capabilities or $30K for a 6500 8-port gigabit switch module have you *seen* the testing that goes into one of those things? do you know the man-hours of r&d that go into one of those devices? sure, they do offer support in smartnet. sure, it is expensive to maintain said service contracts. have you ever had to use a smartnet for hardware repairs? i've had a *generic* hardware support contract give me a device the next day to replace my broken one. i'm sorry, if i (or any of my customers) are paying for this support, then i will take it.
how is this any different than a provider charging you thousdand plus per month for a t1 line? it goes for support, overhead, etc.
said by bky :It's ALL marketing. so is everything else. cisco is no different.
said by bky :Cisco has the staple because they got there first and you don't think that it is because that they make good quality devices? what about kay-pro computers, or commodore? they were here first too, but have they survived? they either died or were bought out.
said by bky :In fact, Cisco uses ghost manufacturers to produce most (if not all) of the gear they sell anyway they may contract out for the actual assembly once the design is done, but what do you think about the r&d and design?
who actually manufactures their own stuff anymore? once the design is setup, contract out your specs and go.
said by bky :If you really believe that you're smoking bad crack nah, i make my own. higher quality
q. | |
|
| | | | | DarkLogix
join:2008-10-23
Baytown, TX
·Comcast Workplace
·Comcast
| Cisco easy
and cisco is more than a software company the hardware isn't some generic just its purpose built
and if you compair cisco to a software router with heavy testing you'll see butI doubt you could afford a 3845 or a 7613 for that matter
ya a lot of prople will come around and say hay this free software can beat such and such but if put to a real test then its not as likely as you think
and just try finding a PC that can even handle an OC-48 let alone a OC-768 and even less the 100Gbit fiber thats coming
it just woun't be able to so the software routers can't compete with the likes of the 7613 or the CRS-1 | |
|
| | | | | | 
jhboricua
ExMod 2000-01
join:2000-06-06
Minneapolis, MN
clubs:
1 edit | Re: Google routers said by DarkLogix :Cisco easy and cisco is more than a software company the hardware isn't some generic just its purpose built If you look at the 2 studies by the Tolly Group I linked you'll see that the commodity hardware used on the Vyatta platform was faster routing packets, had more capacity for holding BGP routes and was faster converging them by a substantial margin compared to the Cisco hardware it ran against. Cisco would like you to believe that purpose built hardware is better in all scenarios but that's a lie. It sure give's them some hefty profit margins from those who believe that crap.
said by DarkLogix :and if you compair cisco to a software router with heavy testing you'll see butI doubt you could afford a 3845 or a 7613 for that matter ya a lot of prople will come around and say hay this free software can beat such and such but if put to a real test then its not as likely as you think That's exactly what Tolly did, and their results indicate otherwise. A little over $7k+ Vyatta platform soundly out-performing an over 30k+ Cisco router. You should at least backup your statements.
said by DarkLogix :and just try finding a PC that can even handle an OC-48 let alone a OC-768 and even less the 100Gbit fiber thats coming it just woun't be able to so the software routers can't compete with the likes of the 7613 or the CRS-1 Where is this assumption that a PC based router is not able to handle a OC48 coming from? Just curious, honestly, since I've seen this claim repeated several times on this thread. I can see how the old PCI-X bus could limit a server PC hardware-wise but with the bandwidth available on the PCIe bus, and 10G cards readily available, what's the limiting factor? Can you cite any studies that have been made or is this just another assumption on your part? | |
|
| | | | | | | deepblackmag
join:2004-12-27
00000
| Re: Google routers By all means build an open source competitor to the cisco nexus datacenter switches. The 7018s have 18 slots. that means 16 slots of 32port 10gigabit ethernet linecards connected with a monsterous switch fabric with day ultimate capability of 15terabits per second. The new hardware is beyond compare from the x86 space. Same holds true for the CRS-1 and GSR routing platforms. Those Vyatta "studies" compare modern dual xeons with ancient 7200s. Congradulations on comparing apples to oranges but try to hold a flame to some of the new monster equipment.
There is alot more than simply passing packets to contend with here too. All the security, QOS, and integrated functionality that comes with the IOS or IOS-XR or IOS-XE or NXOS or ASA OS... yah cisco is #1 for a reason. (except in firewall space.. that juniper SRX 100gbps firewall is just a monster and the ASAs or FWSMs cant compete with that kind of thing lol) You would be writing software for decades to try and make a linux box do half the things my little 7200 do. | |
|
| | | | | | | | whosmatt
join:2005-02-28
Raleigh, NC
| Re: Google routers Well said, and I agree.
I think some of the posters were trying to compare cisco's popular security devices with specialized routing / firewall distributions (pfsense FTW!). Both the PIX series and the ASA series do indeed use x86 hardware.
Even top of the line ASA (which uses a Linux kernel) is an 8-core Opteron box.
So that's probably the closest (and most fair) comparison that can be made. | |
|
| | | | | | | |
jhboricua
ExMod 2000-01
join:2000-06-06
Minneapolis, MN
clubs:
| said by deepblackmag :Those Vyatta "studies" compare modern dual xeons with ancient 7200s. Congradulations on comparing apples to oranges but try to hold a flame to some of the new monster equipment. Its funny that you quote the word 'studies' as to imply they are deceptive. I guess your Cisco fanboyism is getting in the way of your objectivity. At the time of the study, Cisco was still selling this so called 'ancient' 7204 at over 30k+ with the tested configuration, it was not in end of life status either. Claiming its an apples to oranges comparison seems like excuses to me. Then again, a $30k device losing to a $7k device does seems unfair to whoever bought the higher costing device.
said by deepblackmag :You would be writing software for decades to try and make a linux box do half the things my little 7200 do. Apparently I was right about the Cisco fanboyism part, that was a ridiculous statement.
In the high end segments Cisco and Juniper are king for sure, but as I've said before, thats a niche market, much like the high-computing market dominated mostly by 3 vendors (IBM PowerPC, Intel Itanium and Sun UltraSparc). For the vast majority of businesses that don't have these massive traffic requirements, there are much better alternatives than Cisco.
--
"Two things are infinite: the universe and human stupidity; and I'm not sure about the the universe." - Albert Einstein
Jose A. Hernandez * System Admin * MPLS, Minnesota, USA * | |
|
| | | | | | | | | deepblackmag
join:2004-12-27
00000
| Re: Google routers Ill be waiting for callmanager capability with NAC for my x86 hardware. Let me know when you have managed to integrate a complete voip solution and security services into a medium business router. (and im not talking about a hokey asterisks install with SNORT running)
Glad to know my zealotry comes through, sometimes i wonder if people understand the depths to which i hate walking into an office and seeing a sonicwall or PC in the corner "running the network".
True career network engineers will understand and appreciate the functionality provided by real enterprise class network gear. Anyone arguing linux as a serious integrated services router replacement is clearly not functioning in the capacity of engineering or operations for a complex global network with drasticly varying requirements. Cisco even with its exorbinant cost saves boatloads of money for most companies when it comes time to scale up or add capabilities to a network. Solving problems on cisco is easy because if it can be done, there is a fairly uniform way to do it where as on linux every solution has to be custom engineered (or copied from a poorly written howto guide). That kind of operational complexity isnt acceptable today, im not just managing a dozen network devices.
Need a gre tunnel? OK!
cisco> int tun105
ip add x.y.z.q
tun source X
tun dest Y
and add a tunnel protect statement to integrate crypto... look at that, im done in under 3 minutes with both sides up and pinging and routing exchanged dynamicly!
Linux> recompile the kernel or load a module to support gre, do the same for IPSEC, manually configure the routing, forget about simple crypto-maps and compile then configure 3 daemons to handle services such as IKE. Spend time researching what app to use and then version that supports the featuers you need and arent broken in release -STABLE thats never quite stable enough... Dont bother trying to do any kind of unequal cost load sharing because linux doesnt run EIGRP as most enterprise networks do... and all for the scant cost of 10 hours of my time. | |
|
| | | | |
| | | | | |
| | | | | | 
N3OGH
Bear patrol must be working like a charm
Premium
join:2003-11-11
Philly burbs | Re: Google routers LOL | |
|
|
jhboricua
ExMod 2000-01
join:2000-06-06
Minneapolis, MN
clubs:
2 edits | There are some high quality router software product based out of Linux at its core such as Vyatta which, when tested by The Tolly Group, already beats Cisco's 7204VXR and 2821ISR units in routing performance using commodity hardware.
Since it is based Open Source software, there's nothing stopping Google from doing something similar.
--
"Two things are infinite: the universe and human stupidity; and I'm not sure about the the universe." - Albert Einstein
Jose A. Hernandez * System Admin * MPLS, Minnesota, USA * | |
|
| |
NetAdmin
CCNA
join:2008-05-22
| Re: Google routers said by jhboricua :There are some high quality router software product based out of Linux at its core such as Vyatta which, when tested by The Tolly Group, already beats Cisco's 72xx and 28xx units in routing performance using commodity hardware. Problem is that Google isn't using routers comparable to 7200 series Ciscos, they are using M120 class routers and up for their data centers. And just as discussed on NANOG, it turns out that can't build an open source, OTS hardware based router that can handle multiple 10Gbps circuits with the assorted mixture OC48+ circuits.
You might be able to get a couple of GigE interfaces in a fast box, but then you are pretty limited as to where you can deploy them. Edge routing, probably, but core or border router, probably not.
--
"This is a bus. You know how big a bus is?" | |
|
| | |
jhboricua
ExMod 2000-01
join:2000-06-06
Minneapolis, MN
clubs:
1 edit | Re: Google routers said by NetAdmin :Problem is that Google isn't using routers comparable to 7200 series Ciscos, they are using M120 class routers and up for their data centers. And just as discussed on NANOG, it turns out that can't build an open source, OTS hardware based router that can handle multiple 10Gbps circuits with the assorted mixture OC48+ circuits. Agreed, however that's more of a niche market. I was merely commenting on the assertion that "building routers of the caliber of Juniper and Cisco isn't an overnight or easy task." Router appliances such as Vyatta provides features, performance, flexibility and price for the majority of businesses out there that Cisco and Juniper can't match. | |
|
| | | | |
| | | | |
jhboricua
ExMod 2000-01
join:2000-06-06
Minneapolis, MN
clubs:
| Re: Google routers said by tubbynet :but how long did it take to create the vyatta software? i know that certainly *wasn't* overnight. Didn't imply otherwise anywhere on my post.
said by tubbynet :you are also assuming that google will just "rebrand" what has already been done. there are certainly examples out there, but what if they want to use "the google" from the ground up? Actually, I never said anything about rebranding, that's your own assumption. I merely pointed to the fact that there is plenty of OSS code that Google can use to come up with their own router OS. They have done plenty of that in the past.
--
"Two things are infinite: the universe and human stupidity; and I'm not sure about the the universe." - Albert Einstein
Jose A. Hernandez * System Admin * MPLS, Minnesota, USA * | |
|
| | DarkLogix
join:2008-10-23
Baytown, TX
1 edit | Find some open source that can beat a CRS1 then open source might have a shot
I just don't see any major business using open source for a major router
and I'm quite happy with my 3745 w/NME-16ES-1G for my home | |
|
| Kearnstd
Elf Wizard
Premium
join:2002-01-22
Mullica Hill, NJ
| however with how trusted info from the net is, all this could really be is Google making their own firmware for routers allowing them to use current hardware but have more control with their own firmware
--
[65 Arcanist]Filan(High Elf) Zone: Broadband Reports | |
|
Eat Me
join:2002-09-25
Sussex, NJ | Bye bye privacy We all know how Google collects data. I'm sure with their router widely deployed they will own yet another piece of the internet. | |
|
| keyboard5684
join:2001-08-01
Youngsville, PA
·Teliax VOIP
·WestPAnet Inc.
·WestPAnet Inc. CA..
| Re: Bye bye privacy Providers would have to buy Google router first, and I just do not see that really happening.
Providers have been using what they have seen to be reliable and work for them. To say "oooh, a Google router" is not going to convince anyone at a board meeting at an ISP to switch routers out to Google ones.
I think this would be more of a way for Google to get the functionality they need, specifically. Cisco, Juniper, and a few others mainly make there routers able to do everything possible out of the box. Maybe Google just does not want all that crap and needs something specific they could not get from Juniper (or anyone else).
I tried to think about how many routers around the world Google uses and could not come up with a number. However, I am sure it is enough that designing equipment in house surely would have its cost benefits. | |
|
| | 
RARPSL
join:1999-12-08
Suffern, NY
| Re: Bye bye privacy said by keyboard5684 :I think this would be more of a way for Google to get the functionality they need, specifically. Cisco, Juniper, and a few others mainly make there routers able to do everything possible out of the box. Maybe Google just does not want all that crap and needs something specific they could not get from Juniper (or anyone else). I tried to think about how many routers around the world Google uses and could not come up with a number. However, I am sure it is enough that designing equipment in house surely would have its cost benefits. A customized program can often be more efficient than using a "One Size Fits All" one that has lots of unneeded capabilities/code paths. The question is if going this route is justified since you must start writing it from the ground up instead of using the mature and tested application. Depending on the program, there is the option of going with the mature product and tailoring it by turning off unneeded features. Many programs have the capability to having features turned off and removed since they are modular and thus can approach the efficiency of a customized specialized application. | |
|
| | tantivy
join:2007-03-17
Palo Alto, CA
·SONIC.NET
| said by keyboard5684 :Providers would have to buy Google router first, and I just do not see that really happening. Cisco had been around for a decade or more before Juniper was started.. Now look where they are..
said by keyboard5684 :Providers have been using what they have seen to be reliable and work for them. To say "oooh, a Google router" is not going to convince anyone at a board meeting at an ISP to switch routers out to Google ones. True, the Google name by itself is not enough. It all comes down to the final product.. If people test it, and find that it meets their needs, and costs less than the competition, then they may or may not buy it. If enough people decide to buy it, then it may be a successful product.
said by keyboard5684 :I think this would be more of a way for Google to get the functionality they need, specifically. Cisco, Juniper, and a few others mainly make there routers able to do everything possible out of the box. Maybe Google just does not want all that crap and needs something specific they could not get from Juniper (or anyone else). I tried to think about how many routers around the world Google uses and could not come up with a number. However, I am sure it is enough that designing equipment in house surely would have its cost benefits. | |
|
kras2005
Premium
join:2005-12-02
somewhere | San Diego Times? You know, SD Times does not necessarily mean San Diego Times... | |
|
| 
bsc
Premium
join:2003-03-11
Lexington, KY | Re: San Diego Times? LOL!
Good eye. It is actually Software Development Times.
Editor FTL. | |
|
|
|
vonguard
@asani.com | Re: Old News Wrong. Google is building routers now. We already knew they were building switches, dood. | |
|
|
|
cysco24
| Re: Google confirming rumors Google will be surprised and have a board meeting to see who leaked out the info on their new thinga-ma-bob | |
|
| | DarkLogix
join:2008-10-23
Baytown, TX | Re: Google confirming rumors Thinga-ma-bob is just a codename | |
|
| DarkLogix
join:2008-10-23
Baytown, TX | Google is developing the gruntmaster 6000 which is the economy version of the gruntmaster 9000 but the gruntmaster 6000 is still software upgradeable | |
|
| | |
| | | DarkLogix
join:2008-10-23
Baytown, TX | Re: Google confirming rumors I don't think I want to hook up to those tubes | |
|
playboy2000
join:2005-05-30
Calgary, AB
·TELUS
| Open Source routers While an open source router can easily replace a 2600 or 3600 router, it starts to choke and cannot achieve line rate when the packets are 64bytes and to a certain extent, the latency through the router isn't as quick as a dedicated hardware router.
The last time I read a review, they used 2x netburst xeons, so I would be curious to see how a core i7 would handle, especially with server grade nics on a PCIe bus.
--
The views expressed herein are that of my own and not necessarily that of my employer or any associated entities. | |
|
| 
quetwo
That VoIP Guy
Premium
join:2004-09-04
East Lansing, MI
| Re: Open Source routers The thing is that software just can't replace the reliability and speed of custom-tunes ASICs. Sure, software based routing (which is what the 2600's were) will /work/ but when you have 1GB or 10GB at each port, and 800Gb / 1TB on the fabric, then software just just not the right solution. | |
|
| DarkLogix
join:2008-10-23
Baytown, TX
·Comcast Workplace
·Comcast
| What I'd like to see is (to see what it can really do)
(since they don't seem to have an i7 xeon yet)
DL580 G5 4x 6Core Xeons
4x 10GigE intel copper cards
64GB ram (just so thats not ever an issue)
16x 72Gb 15K SAS drives w/ a P800 controler (might help a little to had as fast of a drive as possible)
then find
2x 10GigE 24Port switches that support etherchannel
do etherchannel of 2x 10GigE to each swithch
then put 22 computers on each switch (optimize ie jumbo frames and all)
then set one computer to be a torrent tracker with a 1TB torrent
and join them to the torrent
then show the CPU load on the server
and do other tests | |
|
| | playboy2000
join:2005-05-30
Calgary, AB
·TELUS
| Re: Open Source routers said by DarkLogix :What I'd like to see is (to see what it can really do) (since they don't seem to have an i7 xeon yet) snip I would suggest that with jumbo frames it would work ok, but as soon you get down to 64byte frames the thing would slow to less than 500mbps
--
The views expressed herein are that of my own and not necessarily that of my employer or any associated entities. | |
|
| | | DarkLogix
join:2008-10-23
Baytown, TX | Re: Open Source routers thats my guess as well (exept I don't think it could handel 40Gbit
but for completness both ends need to be tested | |
|
insomniac84
join:2002-01-03
Schererville, IN | What about fon? Google has a stake in it. So wouldn't this technically be Google's second router? | |
|
kshymkiw
join:2004-12-21
Columbus, OH
1 edit | Residential Does anyone actually think this may be a Residential Router to compete with Cisco/Linksys and not necessarily a Core type of Router.
Google, wouldn't really benefit from investing hundreds of millions of dollars to only deploy routers on their own network.
As well most Open Source stuff, VYATTA included, can't do line rate 10G. I would almost bank Google runs nothing but 10G. I would also bank google is using T-series (640 or 1600) and not the M120's. | |
|
v35_pilot
Whoops, there goes another AMU
Premium
join:2005-12-12
Fayetteville, NY | When you want a job done right, you do it yourself Understand this sentiment. I hate borrowing tools from neighbors. Instead I buy all my own tools so I do not have to owe anyone else a thing. | |
|
|
See 6 replies to this post |
|
|
chilibball
join:2008-11-20
Albany | software Google is only writing the firmware for the router. They are not building the router themselves. Just like they did with the G1. They only created the software and let another company make the device to run it on. | |
|
|
fcisler
Premium
join:2004-06-14
Riverhead, NY
| Idiot article writer.... See the sdtimes follow up article.
I lost all respect for that site and author when I read this tidbit:
the best form of security, these days, is obscurity Yeah...lemme change my SSH port to 222 and take my password out. Disable ping so "no one thinks i'm there". Turn off broadcasting my SSID so no one can find me.
The only time this is possibly true is when you are dealing with an inexperienced idiot. Other than that, it adds a small challenge to the mix.
He is an idiot if he really believes that.... | |
|
SolarPup
IT Geek-Dawg
Premium
join:2002-03-07
The Pound
clubs: | Certification? Gee, where can I line up to take the GCNA? | |
|
|
|
|
Rumor: Google Cooking Up Own Router
