[c-nsp] C65K: Any significant correlation between import filter route-map complexity and BGP Router process utilization?

[Mack McBride]

The newer IOS code appears to convert the ACL match rules into prefix lists.
They would still be less efficient from the initial processing perspective.
But from an update processing perspective I am guessing they are competitive with prefix lists.

Eliminating anything with regex is obviously the first thing to speed routing updates.
Keeping any as-path and community match rules short would be the second thing.
Keep the number of route-map entries small.

Route maps are definitely one place where shorter is better.

Mack McBride
Network Architect

-----Original Message-----
From: cisco-nsp-bounces at puck.nether.net [mailto:cisco-nsp-bounces at puck.nether.net] On Behalf Of Keegan Holley
Sent: Sunday, September 05, 2010 9:06 AM
To: Łukasz Bromirski
Cc: cisco-nsp at puck.nether.net
Subject: Re: [c-nsp] C65K: Any significant correlation between import filter route-map complexity and BGP Router process utilization?

No worries... I'll try to use more than one sentence when I post in the
future.  To answer the original poster's question the only way to cut down
on cpu usage for routing updates is to use prefix lists with the shortest
bit masks possible.  They were created especially for this
purpose although the software architecture details escape me at the moment.


2010/9/5 Łukasz Bromirski <lukasz at bromirski.net>

> On 2010-09-05 04:11, Keegan Holley wrote:
> > I understand turbo ACLs.  I was saying that the enhancements only apply
> to
> > packet manipulations not routing protocols.  I'm not sure if it is
> causing
> > the issues that started this thread, but the only way to optimize route
> > filters is to use prefix lists to match the routes.  For example all the
> > items in the link you sent pertain to packet filtering, QOS or natting.
> >  Correct me if I'm wrong but, I don't believe the improvements in ACL
> > processing applied to those used for route filters.
>
> Right, if the ACL is used for route manipulation, CPU has to process it
> and there's no added value in hardware processing even if platform
> supports it. Sorry, I didn't get your point.
>
> --
> "Everything will be okay in the end.  |                 Łukasz Bromirski
>  If it's not okay, it's not the end." |      http://lukasz.bromirski.net
> _______________________________________________
> 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/
>
>
>
_______________________________________________
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/