Sorry for the screwy formatting, here should be a better output:
Sup2T-XL output of "sh platform hardware capacity":
CAT6500-RC2TXL#sh platform hardware capacity | begin L3 Forwarding Res
L3 Forwarding Resources
FIB TCAM usage: Total Used %Use
72 bits (IPv4, MPLS, EoM) 1048576 466211 44%
144 bits (IP mcast, IPv6) 524288 14905 3%
288 bits (IPv6 mcast) 262144 1 1%
detail: Protocol Used %Used
IPv4 466209 44%
MPLS 1 1%
EoM 1 1%
IPv6 14896 3%
IPv4 mcast 9 1%
IPv6 mcast 1 1%
Adjacency usage: Total Used %Used
1048576 32018 3%
Sup720BXL output of "sh platform hardware capacity":
(FIB TCAM partitioned with "mls cef maximum-routes ip 768")
CAT6500-RC720BXL#sh platform hardware capacity | begin L3 Forwarding Res
L3 Forwarding Resources
FIB TCAM usage: Total Used %Used
72 bits (IPv4, MPLS, EoM) 802816 467625 58%
144 bits (IP mcast, IPv6) 122880 14975 12%
detail: Protocol Used %Used
IPv4 467615 58%
MPLS 9 1%
EoM 1 1%
IPv6 14968 12%
IPv4 mcast 4 1%
IPv6 mcast 3 1%
Adjacency usage: Total Used %Used
1048576 1480 1%
On 05/11/2013 17:18, Jon Lewis wrote:
Your paste formatting got all screwy, but it looks like the Sup2TXL
claims it can do both 1M v4 routes _and_ half a million v6 routes
simultaneously. I've heard that from others, but also read the specs to
be the same as the 3BXL. I wonder if anyone from cisco can shed some
light on this?
On the Sup2T-XL, had you done any mls cef maximum-routes tuning? The
page below both states that the PFC4XL has no more FIB capacity than the
PFC3XL, and that the default split on the PFC4XL is 512k IPv4 routes.
This doesn't appear consistent with what you're seeing.
http://www.cisco.com/en/US/prod/collateral/switches/ps5718/ps708/white_paper_c11-676346.html
The FIB in the PFC4 contains 256 K entries, while the FIB in the PFC4XL
contains 1 million entries. These are the same as their PFC3x forwarding
engine counterparts. The FIB in the PFC4 contains prefix entries for
IPv4 and IPv6 global address, IPv4 and IPv6 multicast addresses and MPLS
label entries. There is a level of partitioning that exists to ensure
there is always some space available for different types of forwarding
entries. There is some flexibility from a user configuration standpoint
that allows these partition boundaries to be changed to accommodate more
of one type of forwarding entry. For example, in the PFC4XL, the default
setting provides for 512 K IPv4 entries, and this can be increased
through configuration control to support up to 1 M entries if required.
On Tue, 5 Nov 2013, Christian Schmit wrote:
Today I tested a Sup2T-XL and a Sup720BXL in the lab with full bgp
feeds for ipv4 and ipv6.
To my understanding the hardware capacity for the FIB TCAM is the same
for Sup720-BXL and Sup2T-XL.
Sup2T-XL output of "sh platform hardware capacity":CAT6500-RC2TXL#sh
platform hardware capacity | begin L3 Forwarding Resources
L3 Forwarding Resources FIB TCAM
usage: Total Used
%Used 72 bits (IPv4, MPLS, EoM) 1048576
465980 44% 144 bits (IP mcast, IPv6)
524288 14903 3% 288 bits (IPv6
mcast) 262144 1 1%
detail: Protocol
Used %Used
IPv4 465978
44% MPLS
1 1%
EoM 1 1%
IPv6
14894 3% IPv4
mcast 9
1% IPv6 mcast
1 1%
Adjacency usage: Total
Used
%Used
1048576 32018 3%
Sup720BXL output of "sh platform hardware capacity": (FIB TCAM
partitioned with "mls cef maximum-routes ip 768")
CAT6500-RC720BXL#sh platform hardware capacity | begin L3 Forwarding
Resources
L3 Forwarding Resources
FIB TCAM usage: Total
Used %Used
72 bits (IPv4, MPLS, EoM) 802816
467348 58%
144 bits (IP mcast, IPv6) 122880
14970 12%
detail: Protocol
Used %Used
IPv4
467338 58%
MPLS
9 1%
EoM
1 1%
IPv6
14963 12%
IPv4 mcast
4 1%
IPv6 mcast
3 1%
Adjacency usage: Total
Used %Used
1048576
1481 1%
The release notes say:
-XL mode:
· IPv4 and MPLS: Up to 1,007,000 routes
· IPv4 multicast and IPv6 unicast and multicast: Up to 503,000 routes
"These are the theoretical maximum numbers of routes for the supported
protocols (the maximums are not supported simultaneously):"
The above output of the Sup2T-XL seems to say that the Sup2T-XL has a
larger FIB TCAM (2M) than the Sup720-BXL.
Christian
_______________________________________________
cisco-nsp mailing list [email protected]
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nsp
archive at http://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-nsp/
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Jon Lewis, MCP :) | I route
| therefore you are
_________ http://www.lewis.org/~jlewis/pgp for PGP public key_________
_______________________________________________
cisco-nsp mailing list [email protected]
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nsp
archive at http://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-nsp/
