[c-nsp] 3550 as a BGP Router
Gaurav Sabharwal
gaurav at inwire.net
Wed Sep 12 14:07:44 EDT 2007
on 09/12/2007 06:31 PM Daniel Suchy said the following:
> There should be no problem. We had 3550-12G with ~70 BGP sessions on it
> in the past (it was used as "router" for internet exchange).
Ditto that. Some output below from a 3550-24 with couple of BGP peers +
RIP + some PBR.
#sh ip route summary
IP routing table name is Default-IP-Routing-Table(0)
Route Source Networks Subnets Overhead Memory (bytes)
connected 0 4 256 640
static 10 53 4032 16200
rip 0 491 31424 78560
bgp 65506 157 1193 86400 220080
External: 1350 Internal: 0 Local: 0
internal 242 285560
Total 409 1741 122112 601040
#sh proc cpu | i CPU
CPU utilization for five seconds: 0%/0%; one minute: 1%; five minutes: 1%
#sh proc memory | i Total
Total: 53933256, Used: 10876088, Free: 43057168
Cheers,
- Gaurav
> Regards,
> Daniel
>
> On 09/12/2007 05:51 PM, 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?
>>
>> .Skeeve
>>
>> --
>> Skeeve Stevens, RHCE
>> skeeve at skeeve.org / www.skeeve.org
>> Cell +61 (0)414 753 383 / skype://skeeve
>>
>> eintellego - skeeve at eintellego.net - www.eintellego.net
>> --
>> I'm a groove licked love child king of the verse
>> Si vis pacem, para bellum
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> 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/
>
More information about the cisco-nsp
mailing list