[c-nsp] 3550 as a BGP Router

[Valentin Stoicescu]

Will Hargrave wrote:
> Arie Vayner (avayner) wrote:
>   
>> One thing to worry about in 3550 is the number of actual routes
>> installed in the FIB, as it installs them in the HW forwarding TCAM,
>> which does not have too much room (something like 2000 should be the
>> safe limit). If all you need is 100 routes, then it should be fine.
>>     
>
> On this note, I see many folk who have installed Cat3550/3560/3750
> without setting an appropriate sdm template.
>
> This is pretty much mandatory when deploying them in environments which
> require serious grunt, and selecting an SDM template requires a reboot
> of the switch so it's often too late afterwards.
>
> Folks, please read the docs and set your sdm template (show sdm prefer)
> on these devices.
>
> For the unitiated, the sdm template sets how you slice your available
> TCAM space into layer-2 FIB, ACL, layer-3 FIB, and features like vrflite
> and policy routing. "show sdm prefer".
>
> Will
>
>
>   
I agree with will , i have a 3560 on which i run 2 bgp sessions that 
it's sending me each ~ 3300 pfx with a total of installed pfx 3425
with 2x100Mbps .Before "sdm prefer routing" the CPU utilization was 
about 60% after  reloading  with the new template :
#sh processes cpu | i CPU
CPU utilization for five seconds: 22%/0%; one minute: 25%; five minutes: 24%
and i still have room to grow until i get to the limit of 8K indirect 
routes.The sw is doing basic acl for securing the access to it, 
filtering and qos it's done on a linux box.