On 05/09/11 16:35, Phil Mayers wrote:
On 05/09/11 16:29, Jon Lewis wrote:
On Mon, 5 Sep 2011, Alan Buxey wrote:
VS-S2T-10G-XL
1024K (IPv4) 512K (IPv6)
Right...but my point was, that's the same specs claim they make for the
Sup720-3BXL, and it's misleading because at least with the 3BXL, it's 1M
IPv4 routes [and 0 IPv6] OR 512K IPv6 routes [and 0 IPv4], or some
compromise of smaller numbers of each, such as the 622592 IPv4 and
212992 IPv6 I posted.
If they haven't increased the max routes capability of the next
generation Sup vs the 3BXL, then that's very disappointing.
This is all quite well documented here:
http://www.cisco.com/en/US/docs/switches/lan/catalyst6500/ios/12.2SY/release/notes/ol_20679.html#wp2561330
Actually let me rephrase that - "well" documented seems a bit of
misnomer ;o)
With regards the simultaneous maxima, I think it's the same situation as
with the sup720 i.e. the maximums are mutually exclusive.
However, it seems the FIB carving is a bit more dynamic by default, for
example:
#sh platform hardware cef maximum-routes usage
Fib-size: 256k (262144), shared-size: 248k (253952), shared-usage:
1k(1238)
Protocol Max-routes Usage Usage-from-shared
------- ---------- ----- -----------------
IPV4 249 k 2262 (2 k) 1238 (1 k)
IPV4-MCAST 249 k 90 (0 k) 0 (0 k)
IPV6 249 k 566 (0 k) 0 (0 k)
IPV6-MCAST 249 k 8 (0 k) 0 (0 k)
MPLS 249 k 99 (0 k) 0 (0 k)
EoMPLS 249 k 1 (0 k) 0 (0 k)
VPLS-IPV4-MCAST 249 k 0 (0 k) 0 (0 k)
VPLS-IPV6-MCAST 249 k 0 (0 k) 0 (0 k)
...the "566" is about twice the number of IPv6 routes we have, so
clearly an IPv6 route uses two "units" of FIB.
What's not clear to me is how the above corresponds to the "sh plat hard
cap" results shown earlier, which seems to indicate different
carving/numbers.
_______________________________________________
cisco-nsp mailing list [email protected]
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nsp
archive at http://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-nsp/
