Sent with ProtonMail Secure Email.
‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ Original Message ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐
On Wednesday, August 25th, 2021 at 1:51 PM, Claudio Jeker
<cje...@diehard.n-r-g.com> wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 25, 2021 at 02:01:26PM +0200, Kristjan Komlosi wrote:
>
> > On 24. 08. 21 21:59, Laura Smith wrote:
> >
> > > Would be interesting to hear comments from the community on this
> > > comparison :
> > > https://elegantnetwork.github.io/posts/followup-measuring-BGP-stacks/
> > >
> > > N.B. For the record, don't shoot the messenger, I had nothing to do with
> > > these tests, I just became aware of them via the BIRD list. I am
> > > particularly interested in the OpenBSD community comments given one
> > > person on the BIRD list had this to say of OpenBGPD: "OpenBGPd has always
> > > been a dog.".
> >
> > I'm no expert at all, but I'd imagine that OpenBGPD performs at least
> >
> > somewhat differently on Linux, which seems to be what the author used in the
> >
> > tests. My personal BGP server runs OpenBSD on a 512MB VPS, using about 150MB
> >
> > of RAM with full IPv6 table and routing my traffic just fine, though I can
> >
> > imagine the tables turning very quickly with lots of neighbors, as the
> >
> > benchmark shows. I could try replicating their setup on an OpenBSD system,
> >
> > but I don't have good enough hardware at hand at the moment.
>
> The massive amount of memory used in OpenBGPD comes from the fact that
>
> unlike BIRD OpenBGPD runs with a full Adj-RIB-Out.
>
> The tests result in large amount of prefixes that need to be tracked.
>
> If you have 100 peers announcing 10000 random prefixes then you end up with
>
> 100 * 100 * 10000 = 100Million elements to manage. This is not a realistic
>
> test since in most cases the number of routes in the Adj-RIB-Out is
>
> limited (even on route servers). In the end for day to day use OpenBGPD
>
> performs well enough for many people. Future releases will focus more on
>
> performance and optimizing Adj-RIB-Out is on the list.
>
>
Thanks for the insight Claudio. Very much appreciated !
