Re: [j-nsp] BGP memory consumption

From: Daniel L. Golding (dan@netrail.net)
Date: Mon Feb 19 2001 - 10:35:33 EST


Yes - the use is linear, from what I can tell.

The 768M is more than anyone can really use, considering the processor
limitations of a really big routing table. On the other hand, a M40 with
256mb and a 200mhtz IP2, is quite memory limited. I strongly recommend
upgrading these.

When doing a network move to confed BGP, the only router that couldn't
handle it (of many GSRs, M20s and M40s), was a particularly well
connected M40 with 256MB.

Daniel Golding NetRail,Inc.
"Better to light a candle than to curse the darkness"

On Thu, 15 Feb 2001, nicholas harteau wrote:

>
> Your juniper will have RIBs for each peer/protocol pair. In my
> experience the memory use scales linearly all else being equal. Also,
> I'd be hard-pressed to find a scenario outside of a lab where you will
> use more than the 768M of ram that the junipers support these days. My
> AADS router is using 128M with 55 peers and mbgp running as well as bgp.
>
> Josh Richards wrote:
> > How does Juniper's BGP memory consumption compare to, say, a Cisco?
> >
> > While the exact answer obviously varies depending on the peering sessions,
> > what magnitude of memory consumption can I expect to be necessary for
> > the first full transit view (~100,000 prefixes) and each successive
> > additional transit view of similar size?
> >
> > Is the memory consumption in such a way that I can assume that a peer
> > with, say, only 10,000 prefixes is going to consume 10% of the amount of
> > memory as the 100,000 prefix peer?
> >
> > Damn, I can't wait to get a few of these things in the lab...
> >
> > -jr
> >
> > ----
> > Josh Richards [JTR38/JR539-ARIN]
> > <jrichard@geekresearch.com/cubicle.net/fix.net/freedom.gen.ca.us>
> > Geek Research LLC - <URL:http://www.geekresearch.com/>
> > IP Network Engineering and Consulting
> >
>
> --
> nicholas harteau
> nrh@ikami.com
>



This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Mon Aug 05 2002 - 10:42:40 EDT