[c-nsp] ebgp load balancing using maxiumu-paths TCAM impact onSup720-3BXL?

[Brad Hedlund (brhedlun)]

Better to use 'ebgp multihop' and peer to provider router's loopback.   
Then have equal cost static routes to provider's loopback via the two  
physical interface next hop IP addresses.

Cheers,

Brad Hedlund
bhedlund at cisco.com
http://www.internetworkexpert.org


On May 20, 2009, at 9:47 PM, "Peter Kranz" <pkranz at unwiredltd.com>  
wrote:

> Setup is as follows; 2 edge routers, each with a BGP session  
> receiving full
> routes to the same provider router. The provider is load balancing  
> inbound
> traffic to our AS nicely, 50/50 between the edge routers.. I would  
> also like
> to load balance the outbound traffic.. I've considered adding  
> 'maximum-paths
> 2' to install the two equal paths, but an concerned about FIB TCAM  
> impacts.
> Will adding this command cause each equal cost route to take one  
> additional
> TCAM entry, i.e. full routing table x 2 > 524k TCAM limit = EPIC  
> meltdown?
>
>
>
> Current FIB TCAM:
>
> L3 Forwarding Resources
>
>             FIB TCAM usage:                     Total        Used
> %Used
>
>                  72 bits (IPv4, MPLS, EoM)     524288      285506
> 54%
>
>                 144 bits (IP mcast, IPv6)      262144           5
> 1%
>
>
>
> Peter Kranz
> <http://www.UnwiredLtd.com> www.UnwiredLtd.com
> Desk: 510-868-1614 x100
>
> Mobile: 510-207-0000
> <mailto:pkranz at unwiredltd.com> pkranz at unwiredltd.com
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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/