[c-nsp] BGP Architecture Question

[Jason Lixfeld]

Whoops.  Didn't actually read your last post :)

Yes, OER sounds cool.  I'm going to play around with it.

On 18-Nov-04, at 9:05 AM, Rodney Dunn wrote:

> That's exactly what OER is designed to solve.
>
> You can not control just load by a single static
> route setup.  Traffic patterns change and that
> is what OER is designed to handle.  Make adjustments
> as the traffic changes.
>
> There are a bunch of different hacks you can use
> to force load over a couple links and some work
> better than others.  I'm simply given an example
> of a new one that very few people have used because
> it's new.
>
> Rodney
>
>
> On Thu, Nov 18, 2004 at 08:57:33AM -0500, Jason Lixfeld wrote:
>> The 2621XM will take 256MB, the 2621 will take only 64MB.  64MB isn't
>> enough to do a full BGP feed but I would NOT recommend doing a full 
>> BGP
>> feed on one router and a partial feed on another router if your intent
>> is to load balance as opposed to a primary/secondary type
>> configuration.  In a primary/secondary configuration, I think that 
>> sort
>> of thing would be ideal because you are guaranteed a closer primary 
>> and
>> a secondary link type traffic patterns (outbound anyway) if you have a
>> full table on one router and only a default route on the other router.
>>
>> If you want to load balance as opposed to use one link as a primary 
>> and
>> one link as a backup, here's one idea:
>>
>> Tell both of your providers that you no not want to accept a full BGP
>> table.  You only want a default route, peering routes and customer
>> routes from your providers.  This will drop your BGP table to likely 
>> no
>> more than a few thousand routes from both providers.  64MB of DRAM 
>> will
>> be fine for that.  The default route will catch anything that's not a
>> customer or a peering route from either provider and I think you'll
>> find it will balance the traffic quite nicely, again, outbound anyway.
>>
>> On 18-Nov-04, at 7:56 AM, Rodney Dunn wrote:
>>
>>> I didn't go check all the memory requirements for
>>> the 2621 but if you have enough memory that should
>>> work.
>>>
>>> http://www.cisco.com/en/US/netsol/ns471/
>>> networking_solutions_package.html
>>>
>>> The customer I worked with a couple days ago was doing
>>> it on NPEG1's of 72xx's with 1Gig of memory.
>>>
>>> You should be able to control the memory usage of OER to
>>> some degree by changing the number of routes it watches.
>>> I don't have a lot of data on that yet though.
>>>
>>> I'll have to get some more data on that.
>>>
>>> Rodney
>>>
>>>
>>> On Thu, Nov 18, 2004 at 12:27:10PM +1000, Virgil wrote:
>>>> On 18/11/04 2:39 AM, "Rodney Dunn" <rodunn at cisco.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Rodney,
>>>>
>>>>> We then made one of the Routers the
>>>>> OER master while both of the routers served
>>>>> as OER borders.
>>>>
>>>>>>> I will have each T1 going into a seperate router. I have
>>>>>>> one Cisco 2621 and one Cisco 2621XM.
>>>>
>>>> Is that still a viable option on the 2600 platform though?
>>>>
>>>> Virgil
>>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> cisco-nsp mailing list  cisco-nsp at puck.nether.net
>>> https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nsp
>>> archive at http://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-nsp/