last week i installed a router (7200). the full bgp table occupied 11.5 mb.
that's all. in 128 mb you can put the bgp table of the entire galaxy...
> -----Mensaje original-----
> De: Guyler, Rik [EESUS] [SMTP:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Enviado el: Tuesday, September 19, 2000 2:06 PM
> Para: John Kaberna; Cisco Groupstudy (E-mail)
> Asunto: RE: Cisco 3640 grunty enough for full-BGP routing?
>
> I don't know the nuances involved, but he stated that the Internet routing
> table a year ago was over 70,000 routes and is probably closer to 90,000
> routes right now. Maybe you did not see the complete table when you saw
> 20MB? I don't know... Like I said, however, he is a 3xxx CCIE and a
> Cisco SE, so I find it hard to refute his word. Not that I'm saying you
> are wrong, just that I find him to be extremely credible.
>
> Rik
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: John Kaberna [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Monday, September 18, 2000 4:16 PM
> To: Guyler, Rik [EESUS]; Jeff Wang; Cisco Groupstudy (E-mail)
> Subject: Re: Cisco 3640 grunty enough for full-BGP routing?
>
>
> The BGP routing table itself takes up less than 20MB of memory last
> time I checked (only a couple months ago). I don't have access to a
> router running full BGP routes right this moment but someone should verify
> this. I am fairly certain it is less than 20. So, you can run it just
> fine on a 3640 with 128mb. I completely disagree with this "experienced"
> CCIE. However, his routers may have several other services running on
> them that use a lot of memory. A 3640 with 128mb used simply as an
> Internet router running BGP will have no trouble now or in the near
> future. Does anyone have a 3640 w/BGP that could provide some current
> stats?
>
> John
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: Guyler, Rik [EESUS] <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: Jeff Wang <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> ; Cisco
> Groupstudy (E-mail) <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Sent: Monday, September 18, 2000 9:13 AM
> Subject: RE: Cisco 3640 grunty enough for full-BGP routing?
>
> A CCIE, experienced in the service provider market, just
> recently told me that a 3640 *might* be OK at first, but it would really
> be a strain to keep the entire routing table. His reasoning is that 128MB
> RAM barely covers the requirements and will allow no room for growth. He
> went on to say that if you can, use 256MB, 512MB, etc. as new routes that
> are added in the future will drive your memory requirements beyond 128MB.
>
> Rik Guyler
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Jeff Wang [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Monday, September 18, 2000 12:18 AM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Cisco 3640 grunty enough for full-BGP
> routing?
>
>
>
> Hi all,
>
> Just a quick question regarding 3640 with 128MB
> DRAM. Will it be grunty enough to run full-BGP, talking to two different
> providers and getting full routes, with one E1 2Mbps WAN link to each
> provider? What's your minimum configuration from experience?
>
> TIA,
>
> Jeff Wang
>
**NOTE: New CCNA/CCDA List has been formed. For more information go to
http://www.groupstudy.com/list/Associates.html
_________________________________
UPDATED Posting Guidelines: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/guide.html
FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com
Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
