Can you try SRB2?
On Fri, Oct 19, 2007 at 02:31:03PM +0200, Christian Bering wrote: > >From: Oliver Boehmer (oboehmer) [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > Hi Oliver, > > >Can you pls describe which "convergence" you are referring? Time it > >takes after bringing up the session until every other PE has > >the routes? > >Or the table version on the CE and the receiving PE is the same? > > Time it takes for PE1's CPU to fall back to normal utilisation and all > destinations reachable again after PE2 loses an upstream provider. > > Given that PE1 is a "normal" PE terminating customers and PE2 a border > router-like PE terminating an upstream provider. > > >If you talk about a distant PE receiving the full table from the RR via > >iBGP, the overhead will likely depend on the RD setup. I assume you use > >a common RD for the "internet" VRF on all your PEs, right? > > Correct. > > And the RRs (7301s) take very little time to converge. After a minute or > so, the BGP process has fallen to normal levels. The CPUs in SUP720s > aren't overly fast - I am aware of that. > > >This could be one reason. CEs advertising > 200k prefixes are > >not widely seen in 2547bis environments :-) > > I know. :-/ It's somewhat of a shame because on a sheet of paper, it > seems like a good approach. In reality, it's not widely used and doesn't > seem to get tested well or have the code optimised for it. > > >next to PMTUD, none I could think of without knowing more details. > > Already done. > > >>Any improvements to this behaviour in SRB2 over SXE, SXF or SRA? > > >need to know more details.. > > Alright; hope I supplied them. :) > > >From: Rodney Dunn [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > Hi Rodney, > > >I need to check this in the lab but if you look at the vpn table are > >we not allocating a VPNV4 label for each prefix when it's in the > >VRF? > > On PE2 ("border router"), there's an "in label" for every prefix, yes. > No "out label" for locally learned prefixes (from upstreams). > > On PE1 ("normal" PE), there's an "out label" for all prefixes learned > from PE2 and other "border routers". "in label" for locally terminated > prefixes. > > As I wrote initially, it's only the BGP process that chews up CPU during > convergence on PE1 and other "normal" PEs. > > -- > Regards > Christian Bering > IP engineer, nianet a/s > Phone: (+45) 7020 8730 > _______________________________________________ > cisco-nsp mailing list [email protected] > https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nsp > archive at http://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-nsp/ _______________________________________________ cisco-nsp mailing list [email protected] https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nsp archive at http://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-nsp/
