A side note about the relative complexity of the route map. Prefix lists are heavily optimized while as-path handling is not, especially if you use regexes. Standard community lists are easier to process than extended community lists. There are plenty of other caveats to tuning an route-map.
LR Mack McBride Network Architect -----Original Message----- From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Gert Doering Sent: Friday, September 03, 2010 3:01 AM To: Jeremy Reid Cc: cisco-nsp Subject: Re: [c-nsp] C65K: Any significant correlation between import filter route-map complexity and BGP Router process utilization? Hi, On Fri, Sep 03, 2010 at 12:03:55AM -0400, Jeremy Reid wrote: > I believe that route-maps are (largely?) processed in hardware on the > 65K platform (S720-3BXL), but Not at all. Packet *forwarding* (and possibly "ACL dropping", but still, "things related to other people's packets") is done by the hardware. BGP handling is not packet forwarding - all control plane functions are done by the CPU itself. gert -- USENET is *not* the non-clickable part of WWW! //www.muc.de/~gert/ Gert Doering - Munich, Germany [email protected] fax: +49-89-35655025 [email protected] _______________________________________________ cisco-nsp mailing list [email protected] https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nsp archive at http://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-nsp/
