On (2014-06-10 12:39 -0500), Blake Hudson wrote:
Please correct me if I'm wrong, but if the BGP table contains ~500k
prefixes, which are then summarized into ~300k routes (RIB), and the FIB
contains only the best path entries from the RIB, wouldn't the FIB be at
or below 300k?
There is
On Wed, Jun 11, 2014 at 1:28 AM, Saku Ytti s...@ytti.fi wrote:
On (2014-06-10 12:39 -0500), Blake Hudson wrote:
There is nothing to summarize away from global BGP table, if you have number
showing less, it's probably counter bug or misinterpretation.
Global BGP table, single BGP feed, will
Matthew Petach wrote the following on 6/10/2014 7:03 PM:
On the couple Cisco platforms I have available with full tables, Cisco
summarizes BGP by default. Since this thread is talking about Cisco
gear, I think it's more topical than results from BIRD.
One example from a non-transit
I haven't seen anyone bring up this point yet, but I feel like I'm
missing something...
I receive a full BGP table from several providers. They send me ~490k
*prefixes* each. However, my router shows ~332k *subnets* in the routing
table. As I understand it, the BGP table contains duplicate
Hi Blake,
On 10 Jun 2014, at 19:04, Blake Hudson bl...@ispn.net wrote:
In this case, does the 512k limit of the 6500/7600 refer to the RIB or the
FIB? And does it even matter since the BGP prefix table can automatically be
reduced to ~300k routes?
Te 512k limit refers to FIB in the B/C
On 6/10/14, 10:15 AM, Łukasz Bromirski wrote:
Hi Blake,
On 10 Jun 2014, at 19:04, Blake Hudson bl...@ispn.net wrote:
In this case, does the 512k limit of the 6500/7600 refer to the RIB or the
FIB? And does it even matter since the BGP prefix table can automatically be
reduced to ~300k
Łukasz Bromirski wrote the following on 6/10/2014 12:15 PM:
Hi Blake,
On 10 Jun 2014, at 19:04, Blake Hudson bl...@ispn.net wrote:
In this case, does the 512k limit of the 6500/7600 refer to the RIB or the FIB?
And does it even matter since the BGP prefix table can automatically be reduced
Hello,
On 10.6.2014 19:04, Blake Hudson wrote:
I haven't seen anyone bring up this point yet, but I feel like I'm
missing something...
I receive a full BGP table from several providers. They send me ~490k
*prefixes* each. However, my router shows ~332k *subnets* in the routing
table. As I
On 10 Jun 2014, at 19:39, Blake Hudson bl...@ispn.net wrote:
And yes, you’re right - no matter how many neighbors you have, the FIB
will only contain best paths, so it will be closer to 500k entries in
total rather than N times number of neighbours.
Please correct me if I'm wrong, but if the
On 6/10/14, 10:39 AM, Blake Hudson wrote:
Łukasz Bromirski wrote the following on 6/10/2014 12:15 PM:
Hi Blake,
On 10 Jun 2014, at 19:04, Blake Hudson bl...@ispn.net wrote:
In this case, does the 512k limit of the 6500/7600 refer to the RIB
or the FIB? And does it even matter since the
joel jaeggli wrote the following on 6/10/2014 1:10 PM:
On 6/10/14, 10:39 AM, Blake Hudson wrote:
Łukasz Bromirski wrote the following on 6/10/2014 12:15 PM:
Hi Blake,
On 10 Jun 2014, at 19:04, Blake Hudson bl...@ispn.net wrote:
In this case, does the 512k limit of the 6500/7600 refer to
On Tuesday, June 10, 2014 08:07:35 PM Łukasz Bromirski
wrote:
Because you need to do your own summarization or ask your
upstreams to do it for you. Until then, most of transit
accepts loosely prefixes in exact length but also longer
(i.e. /24 but also both /25s).
A couple of major service
On Tue, Jun 10, 2014 at 11:36 AM, Blake Hudson bl...@ispn.net wrote:
joel jaeggli wrote the following on 6/10/2014 1:10 PM:
On 6/10/14, 10:39 AM, Blake Hudson wrote:
Łukasz Bromirski wrote the following on 6/10/2014 12:15 PM:
Hi Blake,
On 10 Jun 2014, at 19:04, Blake Hudson
My 2c:
The obvious thing for me is if people are running a full ipv4 route table on a
box only just capable of handling one single table of that size, then really
now is the time to asses if you really need to hold that table or just drop to
default +internal+peers. If you have multiple up
70952240 bytes of memory
29 multipath network entries and 58 multipath paths
-Original Message-
From: NANOG [mailto:nanog-boun...@nanog.org] On Behalf Of Tony Wicks
Sent: Tuesday, June 10, 2014 6:45 PM
To: 'nanog'
Subject: RE: Getting pretty close to default IPv4 route maximum for 6500/7600
--
From: Irwin, Kevin kevin.ir...@cinbell.com
Date: Wed, May 7, 2014 at 10:39 AM
Subject: Re: Getting pretty close to default IPv4 route maximum for
6500/7600 routers.
To: nanog@nanog.org nanog@nanog.org
I¹m really surprised that most people have not hit this limit already
From: NANOG [mailto:nanog-boun...@nanog.org] On Behalf Of Irwin, Kevin
Sent: Wednesday, May 07, 2014 4:39 PM
I¹m really surprised that most people have not hit this limit already,
especially
on the 9K¹s, as it seems Cisco has some fuzzy math when it comes to the
512K limit.
I would
On May 9, 2014, at 2:48 PM, Vitkovský Adam adam.vitkov...@swan.sk wrote:
With 6500/7600 I can understand they've been around for ages and no one
anticipated the 512k limit back then.
Actually, it *was* anticipated. It's just that those who designed the ASIC
didn't necessarily envision
...@cinbell.com
Date: Wed, May 7, 2014 at 10:39 AM
Subject: Re: Getting pretty close to default IPv4 route maximum for
6500/7600 routers.
To: nanog@nanog.org nanog@nanog.org
I¹m really surprised that most people have not hit this limit already,
especially on the 9K¹s, as it seems Cisco has some
.
-- Forwarded message --
From: Irwin, Kevin kevin.ir...@cinbell.com
Date: Wed, May 7, 2014 at 10:39 AM
Subject: Re: Getting pretty close to default IPv4 route maximum for
6500/7600 routers.
To: nanog@nanog.org nanog@nanog.org
I¹m really surprised that most people have not hit
On Thursday, May 08, 2014 04:45:09 PM Irwin, Kevin wrote:
It depends, you can put in a table-map to stop the routes
from being installed into the FIB/RIB on an ASR-1K with
2GB of RAM you can then have up to 2 million IPv4
routes.
Helpful only if you don't want to forward traffic through
the
I know most people have problems with 2 bgp feeds and 4GB RAM on
ASR1002-F (as it max installable memory). So I doubt about 2M routes
with 2GB RAM.
On 08.05.2014 18:45, Irwin, Kevin wrote:
on an ASR-1K with 2GB of RAM you can then have
up to 2 million IPv4 routes
On Thursday, May 08, 2014 05:29:08 PM Nikolay Shopik wrote:
I know most people have problems with 2 bgp feeds and 4GB
RAM on ASR1002-F (as it max installable memory). So I
doubt about 2M routes with 2GB RAM.
I've never ran the ASR1002-F, but I know some other ASR1000
platforms consume half
On Tue, May 06, 2014 at 03:39:13PM +, Drew Weaver wrote:
I am wondering if maybe we should make some kind of concerted effort to
remind folks about the IPv4 routing table inching closer and closer to the
512K route mark.
Closer to? Internap announces 507K prefixes to me today.
...@up.net wrote:
Do the ASR1k routers have this issue as well? I searched around but
couldn't find any information.
-- Forwarded message --
From: Irwin, Kevin kevin.ir...@cinbell.com
Date: Wed, May 7, 2014 at 10:39 AM
Subject: Re: Getting pretty close to default IPv4
On 05/06/2014 05:39 PM, Drew Weaver wrote:
I am wondering if maybe we should make some kind of concerted effort to remind
folks about the IPv4 routing table inching closer and closer to the 512K route
mark.
Thanks for this e-mail with clear subject ;)
Did anyone yet calculated roughly when
I¹m really surprised that most people have not hit this limit already,
especially on the 9K¹s, as it seems Cisco has some fuzzy math when it
comes to the 512K limit.
Also make sure you have spare cards when you reload after changing the
scaling, those old cards don¹t always like to come back.
On
, 2014 at 10:39 AM
Subject: Re: Getting pretty close to default IPv4 route maximum for
6500/7600 routers.
To: nanog@nanog.org nanog@nanog.org
I¹m really surprised that most people have not hit this limit already,
especially on the 9K¹s, as it seems Cisco has some fuzzy math when it
comes
, May 7, 2014 at 10:39 AM
Subject: Re: Getting pretty close to default IPv4 route maximum for
6500/7600 routers.
To: nanog@nanog.org nanog@nanog.org
I¹m really surprised that most people have not hit this limit already,
especially on the 9K¹s, as it seems Cisco has some fuzzy math when
Do the ASR1k routers have this issue as well? I searched around but couldn't
find any information.
Not really (according to Cisco) -
ESP10 - 1,000,000 IPv4 or 500,000 IPv6 routes
ESP20 - 4,000,000 IPv4 or 4,000,000 IPv6 routes
ESP40 - 4,000,000 IPv4 or 4,000,000 IPv6 routes
On 06/05/2014 16:39, Drew Weaver wrote:
In case anyone wants to check on a 6500, you can run: show platform
hardware capacity pfc and then look under L3 Forwarding Resources.
to fix the problem on sup720/rsp720:
Router(config)#mls cef maximum-routes ip 768
This requires a reload to take
On Tue, 6 May 2014, Drew Weaver wrote:
Hi all,
I am wondering if maybe we should make some kind of concerted effort to remind
folks about the IPv4 routing table inching closer and closer to the 512K route
mark.
We are at about 94/95% right now of 512K.
For most of us, the 512K route mark
On 5/6/2014 11:39 AM, Drew Weaver wrote:
Hi all,
I am wondering if maybe we should make some kind of concerted effort to
remind folks about the IPv4 routing table inching closer and closer to the
512K route mark.
We are at about 94/95% right now of 512K.
For most of us, the 512K route
-Original Message-
From: Nick Hilliard [mailto:n...@foobar.org]
Sent: Tuesday, May 6, 2014 12:11 PM
To: Drew Weaver; 'nanog@nanog.org'
Subject: Re: Getting pretty close to default IPv4 route maximum for 6500/7600
routers.
This problem also affects ASR9000 boxes running typhoon line
On 06/05/2014 18:01, Drew Weaver wrote:
I believe you mean This problem also affects ASR9000 boxes running
...trident... line cards. Please confirm?
er, yes, trident cards, not typhoon cards.
typhoon cards are not affected by this.
Nick
I just recently got four sets off eBay. Purportedly genuine Cisco. A
shade over $100. Raid the departmental beer fund. :)
-r
Vlade Ristevski vrist...@ramapo.edu writes:
It would probably be a good time to upgrade the memory on my 7206
NPE-G1 as well (512MB). I was going to replace the
On 5/6/2014 10:39 AM, Drew Weaver wrote:
Just something to think about before it becomes a story the community
talks about for the next decade.
Like we have for the last two?
--
Requiescas in pace o email Two identifying characteristics
of
37 matches
Mail list logo
