You should be able to run that many racks inside a single OSPF area - in fact, multiple areas can result in a lot of type 3 LSAs if you do not summarize properly. You can improve initialization times and keep the LSDB down to one LSA per router if you:
1.) Set the RVIs on the ToRs to passive (to keep type 2 LSAs from being generated for the host subnets) 2.) Configure all of the ToR<->EX4550 links as point-to-point (ditto, plus avoid the DR election delays) At larger scales the frequency of LSA refreshes and SPF runs would make multiple areas (or other solutions) worthwhile, but for these platforms you're probably looking at hundreds of racks (or lots of really flaky links ;) before that even begins to be a conern. I can't think of anything BGP would provide that would be of significant benefit based on what you've described - plus I believe it requires additional licensing on those platforms. :w On Tue, Jun 4, 2013 at 7:24 PM, Ihsan Junaidi Ibrahim <[email protected]> wrote: > Hi, > > I'm building an infrastructure which comprises of a few tens of racks with > Hadoop, Supermicro MicroCloud and whatnot running. Each rack probably will > have EX4200 or EX3300 ToR switch, individually at the moment, not VC-chained. > These switches will have a couple of EX4550 aggregating the circuits. > > My question is what would be the best routing protocol in this kind of > scenario? > > I'm thinking multi-areas OSPF/v3 but would a flat OSPF area 0 topology with > BGP make more sense? I don't have a lot of exposure in dense datacenter > routing so I'm bringing the conventional WAN routing thinking cap into the > picture. > > Thanks. > > > _______________________________________________ > juniper-nsp mailing list [email protected] > https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp _______________________________________________ juniper-nsp mailing list [email protected] https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp
