[c-nsp] SUP720's memory, looking at options..

[Mack McBride]

That code is definitely subject to memory leaks.
Specifically if you have a shut down BGP session.
That is also in some revs of SXI.
Later revs tend to have fewer bugs since they are mostly patching bugs.


Mack McBride | Senior Network Architect | ViaWest, Inc.
O: 720.891.2502 | C: 303.720.2711 | mack.mcbride at viawest.com | www.viawest.com


-----Original Message-----
From: cisco-nsp [mailto:cisco-nsp-bounces at puck.nether.net] On Behalf Of Howard Leadmon
Sent: Monday, July 04, 2016 11:37 AM
To: 'Jon Lewis'
Cc: 'cisco-nsp'
Subject: Re: [c-nsp] SUP720's memory, looking at options..

 FYI, the version I am currently running is 12.2(33)SXJ1, and though I know it's not the newest thing going, it for sure has served us well with an
uptime of 4 years, 51 weeks, 4 days, 19 minutes as of this message.    I
have little doubt that a reboot may free up some memory, if nothing else some more contiguous chunks, but from all I have read here recently, with taking full routes this is a short term stop gap measure at best.

 So what I am trying to figure out, is what is a good path forward that will
last more than a couple months at best.   As mentioned below,  I have looked
at just using the RSP720-3CXL as it will take a lot more RAM reduce running on the edge of a memory allocation failure (plus the faster CPU is good for BGP).  I have looked at using something like the ASR1004/6 as with a full load of RAM it says it will easily do 4 million routes.  Finally I know someone that has a GSR12404 that suggested I use it, and though I know it's not new platform, I can't for the life of me figure out what routing limits
it has.   I for sure need 1G and 10G interfaces (not a lot), also need 32bit
ASN support as we already use it at the IX

 The reboot of the current switch would be easy, but if I need to take the time to haul around big switches/routers, and changing the network around, I figure it just makes good sense to learn what I can to make an informed choice as much as possible.


 Happy 4th to any that celebrate it..


---
Howard Leadmon - howard at leadmon.net
PBW Communications, LLC
http://www.pbwcomm.com

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Jon Lewis [mailto:jlewis at lewis.org]
> Sent: Monday, July 4, 2016 9:34 AM
> To: Howard Leadmon <howard at leadmon.net>
> Cc: 'cisco-nsp' <cisco-nsp at puck.nether.net>
> Subject: Re: [c-nsp] SUP720's memory, looking at options..
>
> On Mon, 4 Jul 2016, Howard Leadmon wrote:
>
> >  I knew with the 720-3BXL's I was running, that eventually the TCAM
> > would become an issue, but it seemed like I still had a little bit
> > of
breathing
> > room left.   Then I saw the chatter here about the RAM on the RP
> exhausting
> > before the TCAM, so went peeking at the switch after reading an earlier
> > thread.     Sure enough, though TCAM was starting to get full, to my
> > surprise when I looked at memory, it was at 92%, so even closer than
> > the TCAM by far to exhaustion.
> >
> > I know I can't just up the RAM on the board, so that now leads me to
> > wonder what are reasonable options to resolve this before it becomes
> > a
> very real
> > and big problem.   First let me say, compared to many here we are small
> > guys, we have a limited budget, and our 6509 has served us well for
> > a
great
> > many years, I think it's about to pass the 5yr uptime mark.   We have
2-3
> > full feeds as uptime is important, and we also peer at the Equinix
> > IX, so have a bunch of additional peering sessions.
>
> Some of the software versions for the 6500 have had BGP related memory
> leaks, and if you've got an uptime of 5yrs, that means you're not
> exactly running recent code, and have had a lot of time for memory to
> get misplaced.  I no longer have access to a 6500 with full feeds, so
> I don't
know if
> 3 full feeds + an IX should be running you out of memory.  An
> upgrade/reboot might be worth a try though.  I'd stay in whatever
> major version you're in though...not try jumping to a much later
> version that
might
> be even more memory hungry.
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>   Jon Lewis, MCP :)           |  I route
>                               |  therefore you are _________
> http://www.lewis.org/~jlewis/pgp for PGP public key_________

_______________________________________________
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/
This message contains information that may be confidential, privileged or otherwise protected by law from disclosure. It is intended for the exclusive use of the addressee(s). Unless you are the addressee or authorized agent of the addressee, you may not review, copy, distribute or disclose to anyone the message or any information contained within. If you have received this message in error, please contact the sender by electronic reply and immediately delete all copies of the message.