On 23 Aug 2012, at 15:04, Raymond Burkholder <[email protected]> wrote:
> To expand the opinion set, how do Quagga, Bird, exaBGP, OpenBGPd hold up for > handling Multi-Protocol BGP Route Reflector duties in a BGP/MPLS environment > for a smaller ISP? I am using BIRD as a RR between a busy VRF and our core and will not change it until the PPS are over what the box can pass :) EuroIX members were presented on a comparison of RR : ASR 1001 / 1002, Bird 1.3.6 / 1.3.7 / OpenBGPd - Quagga is not in the list as they do not use it , they migrated away from it after too many issues AFAICR. They found that both cisco routers which are designed to be used as RR and BIRD were performing very well (even more when you look at what CPU is on those cisco routers). The talk made at Euro-IX was under the password protected section but I found it on their site : http://www.ams-ix.net/downloads/AMS-IX%20Route%20Server%20Implementations%20Performance.pdf They presented their second testing at RIPE : https://ripe64.ripe.net/presentations/49-Follow_Up_AMS-IX_route-server_test_Euro-IX_20th_RIPE64.pdf Thomas
