[c-nsp] 7505, OC3s and BGP

[Matthew Crocker]

If you are pulling in full tables you'll want 256MB in the VIPs.  I  
had a 12k with 128MB LCs that would stop CEF because they ran out of  
RAM.   no CEF on a 12k is bad ( no routing from that LC),  no CEF on   
a VIP is bad (punts to the RSP).  You can filter out your BGP table  
to drop the memory requirements dramatically.

Does the VIP2-50 support 256MB RAM?  You may want VIP4-80s.   When I  
looked at doing this a year ago I came to the conclusion that  
upgrading to a used 12k made more sense.

-matt




On Jul 20, 2005, at 6:03 PM, Bill Wichers wrote:

>> The OC3 to the upstream is bumping up against the ceiling and I am
>> seeing some cells get dropped, hence the second upstream.  And
>> yikes!  That VIP is sitting at 70% processor utilization right now.
>> The OC3 to the customers and other locations is doing alright
>> overall, and the processor on it is around 40-45%.  There is no BGP
>> at all at the present time, so I don't have to worry about flaps
>> yet (haven't missed that) and the RSP4 barely breaks 3% processor
>> utilization.
>>
>
> With BGP, and all dCEF on the router, the RSP is probably going to  
> be at
> around 8-10% CPU utilization. The RSP8 can hold a lot more memory  
> though,
> so if you want to take a lot of BGP feeds that's probably the biggest
> concern you'll have with the RSP. I've never seen an RSP crash that I
> think ECC would have prevented, so I don't think "it has ECC  
> memory" is
> reason enough to want to upgrade. I can fit two full BGP views in  
> an RSP4,
> but I'm not sure if 3 full views would fit in the 256MB max config,  
> so BGP
> memory needs would me the most likely reason to need to upgrade to an
> RSP8.
>
>
>> So, I was thinking skipping the RSP upgrade and just upgrade the
>> VIPs.  Is there that much of an improvement going to a VIP4-80
>> instead of a VIP4-50?
>>
>
> A VIP4-50 is just a VIP2-50 that can take twice the RAM -- they  
> both have
> the same CPU (there is also increased PA bandwidth available on the  
> VIP4*,
> but I doubt you'd any difference from it) The VIP4-80 and VIP6-80  
> have a
> faster CPU and increased switching performance as a result. If CPU  
> load on
> your VIP2-50 is a problem, you'd need to upgrade to at least a  
> VIP4-80 to
> see any improvement.
>
>      -Bill
>
> *****************************
> Waveform Technology
> Systems Engineer
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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/
>

--
Matthew S. Crocker
Vice President
Crocker Communications, Inc.
Internet Division
PO BOX 710
Greenfield, MA 01302-0710
http://www.crocker.com