[c-nsp] 3550 as a BGP Router

[neal rauhauser]

  BGP requires memory to store routes. The 2610 maxes out at 64 meg. The
3550 is hardwired with 64 meg. They're equivalent in terms of storage space
and I think roughly equivalent in processing power. I think a 64 meg box
starts to have trouble around 50k routes if I'm recall correctly. If all the
machine is doing is a dozen peers with a few dozen prefixes each it should
be more than up to the task.




On 9/12/07, Adrian Chadd < adrian at creative.net.au> wrote:
>
> On Thu, Sep 13, 2007, Skeeve Stevens wrote:
> >
> > Hey all
> >
> > I know BGP on switches has been discussed a lot, and how, yes it is
> unwise
> > from number of routes perspective.
> >
> > But what I am looking for is setting up a 3550 with about a dozen ISP's
> > connected to it.
> >
> > The ISP's would BGP peer and announce their own routes into it (<100)
> and
> > basically just take each others routes for a neutral peering situation.
> >
> > Would the 3550 handle that?  Number of routes here isn't an issue. but
> the
> > number of BGP sessions. what wise advice would people offer regarding
> that?
>
> You could always try. That said, for like $200 could you pick up a 2610
> or something similar off ebay as the route server and bypass the problem
> entirely.
>
>
>
>
> Adrian
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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/
>