On 7/21/2010 1:23 PM, Heath Jones wrote: > Chris - Sorry I didnt realise the process had changed names and we are > actually talking about the forwarding process itself. In that case, the > only other thing I can think of right now is: > When the forwarding process starts, it allocates the 400Mb+ for these > tables. The question is if the forwarding process is making a decision > based on the configuration *before* the point of memory allocation as to > if the allocation is required. > > This is what you need to know from Juniper engineers / dev team. It > probably wasn't written that way, and if not it makes searching for > configuration statements to achieve the goal pointless!! > (It's highly unlikely that they coded deallocation functions for those > structs. Much simpler to just restart a process..) > > Please let me know how you go with this - its an interesting problem!
I have disabled and then re-started the process on a live router w/ packet mode config, no change in use. _______________________________________________ juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp
