[c-nsp] BGP Peer Problem with 7200-G2

[Skeeve Stevens]

Awesome.. both sides noted.

HOW processor intensive is it?  A G2 isnt likely to notice? 6 peers, only 2
are full feeds.

...Skeeve

-----Original Message-----
From: cisco-nsp-bounces at puck.nether.net
[mailto:cisco-nsp-bounces at puck.nether.net] On Behalf Of Pete Templin
Sent: Friday, 29 June 2007 12:38 AM
To: Reuben Farrelly
Cc: 'Cisco-nsp'
Subject: Re: [c-nsp] BGP Peer Problem with 7200-G2

Reuben Farrelly wrote:
> 
> it is worth noting that "soft-reconfiguration inbound" has been
discouraged for 
> quite some time now (years in fact, IIRC).
> 
> Quote:
> "Previously, in order to perform a soft reset for inbound routing table
updates, 
> the neighbor soft-reconfiguration command directed the Cisco IOS software
in the 
> local BGP router to store all received (inbound) routing policy updates
without 
> modification. This method is memory-intensive and not recommended unless 
> absolutely necessary. (Outbound updates have never required the extra
memory and 
> are not affected by this feature.)"

Always good to provide both sides of the story: soft-reconfig is no 
longer needed for soft inbound updates.  However, soft-reconfig in can 
provide tremendous troubleshooting ability.  It allows easy analysis of 
the effects of your inbound route-policy (sh ip b x.x.x.x{/y} now shows 
the 'naked' prefix as learned plus the filtered prefix as processed 
inbound), and also allows easy analysis of the prefixes that your 
customers are sending you that are failing the inbound filter (sh ip b n 
x.x.x.x received-r).  For some of the customers we have, this 
functionality is invaluable to leading them towards why things aren't 
working as hoped (but are working as configured+promised).

pt
_______________________________________________
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/