[c-nsp] ibgp on 6509 with sup2?

[Gert Doering]

Hi,

On Wed, Feb 11, 2015 at 10:45:44AM -0800, Joe Pruett wrote:
> > If I remember right, Sup2 had 256k FIB, going to half that if you enable
> > uRPF.  So if you set your iBGP-sessions to "max-prefix 230000" (or
> 115000),
> > and then experiment with feeding it more and more routes, you should
> > be fairly safe...
> 
> my reading of max-prefix doesn't make it very useful. either you reset
> the session after hitting the max, or you just log a warning and then
> continue accepting prefixes. i'll just be very stingy with my export to
> begin with and see how things go.

Well, you reset it, to avoid the 6509 falling over.  It will burn CPU
cycles, and fall back to the default route, but it will *not die*...

[..]
> >> oh, and i run full ipv6 as well, just to make it interesting.
> >
> > Sup2 and IPv6 is software forwarding, so that might be some reason to
> > upgrade eventually...
> 
> so far my cpu is not breathing hard, and i run a routed vlan (with
> software shaping) for every port. but, overall routed traffic is under
> 100mb. even my layer 2 traffic rarely makes the little bar graph on the
> sup2 card flicker. i'm hoping i have years left on this setup. if the
> ibgp pushes things too hard, i'll just live with the inefficient traffic.

6500s never die, they just retire one day when you want more shiny things :-)

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: 291 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <https://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-nsp/attachments/20150211/112c678f/attachment.sig>