[c-nsp] BGP memory on a 6500

Robert E. Seastrom rs at seastrom.com
Tue Oct 3 11:51:28 EDT 2006


I think that doesn't make the problem go away, only delays a bit (and
that might be quite small) when you see the problem.  On the plus
side, the current situation means that TAC will know what's going on
as the routing table creeps towards the cutoff point (modulo a
thousand or two routes +/- per provider).  When aggregatability has a
50% non-deterministic span rather than a 1% non-deterministic span,
things will be rougher for longer.

                                        ---rob


Oliver Dewdney <oliver.dewdney at lbicon.co.uk> writes:

> Or implement aggregation when filling the TCAM, so the problem goes away?
>
> Oli Dewdney
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Robert E. Seastrom [mailto:rs at seastrom.com] 
> Sent: 03 October 2006 12:35
> To: Rodney Dunn
> Cc: cisco-nsp at puck.nether.net
> Subject: Re: [c-nsp] BGP memory on a 6500
>
>
>
> Rodney Dunn <rodunn at cisco.com> writes:
>
>> We are putting in a warning that will go to the syslog when the hw 
>> reaches 95% capacity to give a earlier warning.
>>
>> What we've found is most people just miss/ignore the warning when the 
>> problem happens because they didn't realize at the time reachability 
>> to those destinations could be totally broken. But then a lot of times 
>> the prefixes are covered under a less specific if the same forwarding 
>> next hop so on the surface everything "just works".
>
> This is kind of a scary failure mode.  Perhaps something more noticeable
> than just a syslog entry (something that's printed out after the banner motd
> for instance) might be good.
>
>                                         ---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/
>
> This e-mail is only intended for the person(s) to whom it is addressed and
> may contain confidential information. LBi does not accept responsibility for
> any loss or damage caused by this email or any attachments. Unless clearly
> stated to the contrary, any opinions or comments are personal to the writer
> and are not made on behalf of LBi. If you have received this e-mail in
> error, please notify us immediately at info at lbicon.co.uk and then delete
> this message from your system. Please do not copy it or use it for any
> purposes, or disclose its contents to any other person. Thank you for your
> co-operation.
>
> LBi is the business name of Aspect Internet Holdings Limited, Aspect
> Technologies Limited, LB Icon Limited and Escador Limited.


More information about the cisco-nsp mailing list