[j-nsp] Cisco ASR 9001 vs Juniper MX104

[Colton Conor]

Stephen,

Which RE is that on the MX480? The RE2000 or the quad core one?

On Wed, Dec 2, 2015 at 4:42 AM, Stepan Kucherenko <twh at megagroup.ru> wrote:

> Should've put it here in the first post, got already asked about it
> offlist couple of times.
>
> I was testing it on MX80 with slow RE, so obviously numbers will change on
> faster REs but difference will still be there.
>
> ~1.5min taking full table from MX480 (nice RE, 85k updates)
> ~3min from 7600 (old and slow RE, 89k updates)
> almost 5min from ASR9k (nice RE, 450k updates)
>
> It'll be even more noticeable when Junos will be able to run rpd on a
> dedicated core.
>
>
>
> Keep in mind that it's still not actual convergence time, Junos is still
> lagging with FIB updates long after that.
>
> Sadly I was unable to find my old convergence test numbers but krt queue
> was dissipating for at least couple of minutes after BGP converged. I case
> you're wondering if it was the known rpd bug with low krt priority - no, I
> tested it after it was fixed. Not that I'd call it "fixed".
>
> And that's what I don't like about MX-es :-) Not sure if it's faster or
> slower on ASR9k though.
>
>
> On 02.12.2015 12:30, James Bensley wrote:
>
>> On 1 December 2015 at 17:29, Stepan Kucherenko <twh at megagroup.ru> wrote:
>>
>>> My biggest gripe with ASR9k (or IOS XR in particular) is that Cisco
>>> stopped
>>> grouping BGP prefixes in one update if they have same attributes so it's
>>> one
>>> prefix per update now (or sometimes two).
>>>
>>> Transit ISP we tested it with pinged TAC and got a response that it's
>>> "software/hardware limitation" and nothing can be done.
>>>
>>> I don't know when this regression happened but now taking full feed from
>>> ASR9k is almost twice as slow as taking it from 7600 with weak RE and 3-4
>>> times slower than taking it from MX.
>>>
>>> I'm not joking, test it yourself. Just look at the traffic dump. As I
>>> understand it, it's not an edge case so you must see it as well.
>>>
>>> In my case it was 450k updates per 514k prefixes for full feed from
>>> ASR9k,
>>> 89k updates per 510k prefixes from 7600 and 85k updates per 516k prefixes
>>> from MX480. Huge difference.
>>>
>>> It's not a show stopper but I'm sure it must be a significant impact on
>>> convergence time.
>>>
>>
>> How long timewise is it taking you to converge?
>>
>> Last time I bounced a BGP session to a full table provider it took sub
>> 1 minute to take in all the routes. I wasn't actually timing so I
>> don't know how long exactly.
>>
>> Cheers,
>> James.
>> _______________________________________________
>> juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsp at puck.nether.net
>> https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp
>>
>> _______________________________________________
> juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsp at puck.nether.net
> https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp
>