On Feb 16, 2013, at 10:34 AM, Charles Sprickman <[email protected]> wrote:
> On Feb 8, 2013, at 12:27 PM, Mack McBride wrote: > >> One of the questions I haven't gotten a good answer to. >> The ESP actually has the hardware for the route table. >> The ESP20 and ESP40 handle 4 million routes. >> The others handle less (the 5G for examples handles 500k v4 or 125k v6). > > And the ASR-1002-X with the "integrated" ESP-?? handles "1M IPv4 or 1M IPv6 > routes" according to > http://www.cisco.com/en/US/prod/collateral/routers/ps9343/data_sheet_c78-450070.html > > But the ESP-20 and ESP-40, which share many specs with the mystery embedded > ESP in the 1002-X claims "4M IPv4 or 4M IPv6". > > I don't know what the "OR" means, I can have 1M v4 OR 1M v6 but not some mix > of the two? The use of the word "or" there is strange. It's either 1M for IPv4, 1M for IPv6 or some mix of it, depending on your requirements. > And the RP side is clear as mud as well. The RP2 also claims "4M IPv4 or 4M > IPv6" with the 16GB RAM option, but then the 1002-X "embedded" RP2 is back at > the "1M IPv4 or 1M IPv6" number even though it's possible to order the 1002-X > with 16GB RAM. For the RR role (when the entries are not downloaded to FIB) it'll be around 22-24M depending on the config and the requirements with 16GB of RAM. > Am I understanding the architecture of this correctly? I mean, if my RP2 can > hold 4M routes, which today would be what, about 9 full views, are ALL those > routes shoved down to the forwarding plane, or just the "best" routes? If > so, why can't a lesser-spec'd ESP be limited to 1M routes even if the RP2 has > 4M "possible" paths? Only best entries are programmed into FIB (unless you enable BGP PIC, or additional-paths extensions). That's for typical usage. For RR, you use table-map to stop programming entries into FIB (typical for RR scenario), and you can max-out the RAM with the entries. >> What happens to the other routes? > Maybe we're asking the same question. I hope so. They fail to fit into available RAM, and process responsible for 'getting them' will complain. >> It seems they could get handled in software but the ESP is basically >> software anyway. >> So the situation is clearly opaque. > The 1002-X makes it even more opaque. Someone said earlier in the thread > that the 1002-X is essentially a fixed-config with an RP2 and an ESP-40. But > the specs don't match, at least on the number of routes. They should, it's a question of what's supported today and what will be supported. For example, because of the way the ESP and RP are connected, and the front-facing ports, it's rated at 36Gbit/s maximum - while it's still ESP40. QuantumFlow is a matrix of CPUs - in this sense it's a "software", but given the way those work, how the tasks are programmed and processed on them it's treated as 'hardware forwarding'. >> The MX80 from juniper for example has the same situation and is equally >> opaque. > We've had some very rough times getting similar information on the Juniper MX > series. There is some hint that the RP equivalent can have more routes than > the FIB, but nothing definite and no hard numbers so far after putting in > multiple requests with our Juniper salesperson. We're also getting mixed > answers about whether the integrated GigE ports on the MX are capable of > hierarchical queueing when the chassis is fully "unlocked" as an MX-80 (this > sounds incorrect based on what I've read, but some SE over there is claiming > that's the case). From the practical experience, they're not. But you can also check it out in the official Juniper docs: http://www.juniper.net/techpubs/en_US/release-independent/junos/topics/reference/general/mx80-features.html > All I really want to know is if 3-5 years down the line, assuming these > graphs (http://bgp.potaroo.net/v6/v6rpt.html) are still ramping up and we are > looking at 4-5 full views of v4 and v6 will I be needing to retire the damn > thing. Traffic-wise, both boxes are fine for that long. I also suspect (at > least in the cisco case with the RP2) there is enough cpu power to last quite > some time. > > This is almost making going with a used 6500 bundle look appealing. If you have doubts, look at ASR9001. -- "There's no sense in being precise when | Łukasz Bromirski you don't know what you're talking | jid:[email protected] about." John von Neumann | http://lukasz.bromirski.net _______________________________________________ cisco-nsp mailing list [email protected] https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nsp archive at http://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-nsp/
