[c-nsp] PPPoE termination on 2620

[Siva Valliappan]

On Mon, 11 Oct 2004, Siva Valliappan wrote:

> > According to my sources, under 12.2T, 12.3, and 12.3T, the number of
> > IDBs goes to 800 (from the 300 you mentioned in previous releases) on
> > the 2600 platform.
> >
> > Does a PPPoE(oE) interface eat one IDB, or two?  I'm doing some
> > similar stuff (running PPPoE(oE) on
>
> one per virtual access interface.  so if you have multiple PPPoE sessions
> terminating in a single VLAN or ATM subint, each PPPoE session will
> consume 1, and the VLAN or ATM subint will consume 1 more.
>
> so for N PPPoE sessions, you will use N+1 IDBs in the above scenario.
>
> that said in recent code it's possible to do PPPoE termination over
> VLAN interfaces without using an IDB for the PPPoE session.
>

i got it reversed.  the savings is on the VLAN IDB side (if you were
configuring VLANs for each PPPoE session).  with the IDBless PPPoEoVLAN
termination method, you don't need to use an IDB for each VLAN (you still
use an IDB for the PPPoE session).  you will have to use the "vlan-range"
command tho'


> cheers
> .siva
>
> > non-supported-but-the-code-is-there platforms) and watching my CPU, so
> > I'm kinda curious...  "show idb" shows that it eats a hardware IDB,
> > but is there a software IDB in play too?
> >
> > Thanks,
> >
> >                                         ---Rob
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > 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/
> >
> _______________________________________________
> 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/
>