[c-nsp] L3 Switch as a BGP Gateway

[Scott Granados]

Route limitations are in hardware I believe.

On Jun 27, 2011, at 1:30 PM, Murphy, Jay, DOH wrote:

> How about when you stack them as a logical switch. Couldn't one leverage the memory and processing of the stacking?
> 
> ~Jay Murphy 
> Sr. IP Network Specialist
> NM State Government
> 
> IT Services Division
> PSB – IP Network Management Center
> Santa Fé, New México 87505 
> "We move the information that moves your world." 
> “Engineering is about finding the sweet spot between what's solvable and what isn't."
> “Good engineering demands that we understand what we’re doing and why, keep an open mind, and learn from experience.”
>                                                                                                                                                                            Radia Perlman
> "If human beings are perceived as potentials rather than problems, as possessing strengths instead of weaknesses, as unlimited rather than dull and unresponsive, then they thrive and grow to their capabilities."
> 
>  Please consider the environment before printing e-mail
> 
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: cisco-nsp-bounces at puck.nether.net [mailto:cisco-nsp-bounces at puck.nether.net] On Behalf Of Jay Hennigan
> Sent: Monday, June 27, 2011 1:11 PM
> To: cisco-nsp at puck.nether.net
> Subject: Re: [c-nsp] L3 Switch as a BGP Gateway
> 
> On 6/27/11 11:59 AM, Jason Greenberg wrote:
>> Can someone advise me as to why a 3750 L3 Switch (Metro Model) wouldn't outperform a 7300 series router as a multi-homed BGP gateway?  ISRs and Enterprise class routers are still quite a bit more expensive than the L3 Switches, but I'm starting to not understand why.   I understand that L3 switches are less feature rich on the routing end, but suppose that our ASAs are doing most of the complicated filtering.    I know it doesn't sound "right" to have a 3750G used in this manner, but I am having a hard time finding any real reason why not to do it.
> 
> The memory and number of routes are far too small to use these as a
> border router.  Generally adequate for iBGP to inject customer routes
> into your network but way too little for an Internet-facing border.
> 
> --
> Jay Hennigan - CCIE #7880 - Network Engineering - jay at impulse.net
> Impulse Internet Service  -  http://www.impulse.net/
> Your local telephone and internet company - 805 884-6323 - WB6RDV
> _______________________________________________
> 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/