Re: [c-nsp] ebgp load balancing using maxiumu-paths TCAM impact onSup720-3BXL?

2009-05-21 Thread Brad Hedlund (brhedlun)
Better to use 'ebgp multihop' and peer to provider router's loopback. Then have equal cost static routes to provider's loopback via the two physical interface next hop IP addresses. Cheers, Brad Hedlund bhedl...@cisco.com http://www.internetworkexpert.org On May 20, 2009, at 9:47 PM,

Re: [c-nsp] ebgp load balancing using maxiumu-paths TCAM impact onSup720-3BXL?

2009-05-21 Thread Kevin Loch
I am doing 8 parallel full tables to the same provider on an rsp720 with no issues. You can barely do 6 full tables on a sup720-3bxl. The limitation is processor memory not tcam. Here is what 6 looks like with 12.2SXF16: HeadTotal(b) Used(b) Free(b) Lowest(b)

Re: [c-nsp] ebgp load balancing using maxiumu-paths TCAM impact onSup720-3BXL?

2009-05-21 Thread Kevin Hodle
This would be a good solution if both of his sessions terminated on the same edge router, but in Peter's scenario he has 2 sessions, each on a different edge router so multi-hop load-balacing wouldn't be helpful for him. If he had both upstream provider links on the same edge router, I think he