[c-nsp] impact of policy based routing

[rendo]

Hi Rubens,

Thanks for the answer, do you have any doc or url for the information below?

-rendo-

On Mon, Aug 11, 2008 at 10:09 AM, Rubens Kuhl Jr. <rubensk at gmail.com> wrote:

> It depends on whether the policy route will be only processed by the
> SUP/RSP-720 or not.
>
> Although the following text is from the Cat IOS (ISBU) not 7600 IOS
> (ERBU), my understanding is it reflects what PFC3x can do and can't do
> in hardware:
>
> "The Policy Feature Card (PFC) and any Distributed Feature Cards
> (DFCs) provide hardware support for policy-based routing (PBR) for
> route-map sequences that use the match ip address, set ip next-hop,
> and ip default next-hop PBR keywords.
>
> When configuring PBR, follow these guidelines and restrictions:
> –The PFC provides hardware support for PBR configured on a tunnel
> interface.
> –The PFC does not provide hardware support for PBR configured with the
> set ip next-hop keywords if the next hop is a tunnel interface.
> –If the RP address falls within the range of a PBR ACL, traffic
> addressed to the RP is policy routed in hardware instead of being
> forwarded to the RP. To prevent policy routing of traffic addressed to
> the RP, configure PBR ACLs to deny traffic addressed to the RP.
> –Any options in Cisco IOS ACLs that provide filtering in a PBR
> route-map that would cause flows to be sent to the RP to be switched
> in software are ignored. For example, logging is not supported in ACEs
> in Cisco IOS ACLs that provide filtering in PBR route-maps.
> –PBR traffic through switching module ports where PBR is configured is
> routed in software if the switching module resets. (CSCee92191)
> –Any permit route-map sequence with no set statement will cause
> matching traffic to be processed by the RP.  "
>
> If you manage to keep within these boundaries, CPU load will be as if
> there were no PBR at all. Otherwise, you will either eat up a
> signification port of RSP720 pps capacity, or kill a SUP720.
>
>
> Rubens
>
>
> On Sun, Aug 10, 2008 at 11:47 PM, rendo <r3nd0 at yahoo.com> wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > I'm looking for any cisco documentation or maybe your experiences
> regarding
> > the impact of implementing policy based routing in 76xx platrform. I have
> a
> > plan to put around 5-10 source based routing, each source goes to the
> same
> > outgoing interface but with different IP next-hop. The projected
> throughput
> > will be around 1 Gbps.
> >
> > I guess there are some impacts on CPU load and memory as well, so if
> anyone
> > here has anything to share, it would be great.
> >
> > Thanks in advance.
> >
> > -rendo-
> > _______________________________________________
> > 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/
> >
>