[c-nsp] ebgp load balancing using maxiumu-paths TCAM impact on Sup720-3BXL?

[Ibrahim Abo Zaid]

Hi Peter

If 2 upstream provider provides exactly same routes with same attributes so
BGP will select 2 routes to each destination then TCAM will reach its
maximum as installed BGP routes will be doubled but if some destination are
preferely reachable from one of them and 2nd route will be backup route , so
BGP routes won't be doubled but that depends on percentage

but if you have exactly the same routes from both of them , why u don't use
default ? otherwise u will have to upgrade Sup .


best regards
--Ibrahim
On Thu, May 21, 2009 at 5:40 AM, 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 <http://www.unwiredltd.com/>>
> www.UnwiredLtd.com <http://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/
>