[c-nsp] full routing table / provider-class chassis

[Gert Doering]

Hi,

On Thu, Jun 11, 2009 at 05:17:01PM +0200, Gert Doering wrote:
> > Are you saying that the limit on the number of routes, is actually in 
> > the FIB, ie active routes, so currently would always be about 280k, and 
> > multiple full tables is OK.
> 
> BGP paths that don't go to the FIB are not "routes".  They are just prefixes
> with path info.
> 
> (In other words: yes).

To clarify: this is the way *Cisco* does it.  Information gets collected
inside routing processes, routing processes (here: BGP) select a "winner"
amoing all candidates (= 1 route out of many BGP paths), and the result
goes to the FIB (if it's the protocol with the best preference).

As far as I understand, Juniper handles this a bit different, with no
separate tables for "inside BGP" stuff, so things might look different
there.

gert

-- 
USENET is *not* the non-clickable part of WWW!
                                                           //www.muc.de/~gert/
Gert Doering - Munich, Germany                             gert at greenie.muc.de
fax: +49-89-35655025                        gert at net.informatik.tu-muenchen.de
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 304 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <https://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-nsp/attachments/20090611/98b465e6/attachment.bin>