Stephen, Which RE is that on the MX480? The RE2000 or the quad core one?
On Wed, Dec 2, 2015 at 4:42 AM, Stepan Kucherenko <t...@megagroup.ru> wrote: > Should've put it here in the first post, got already asked about it > offlist couple of times. > > I was testing it on MX80 with slow RE, so obviously numbers will change on > faster REs but difference will still be there. > > ~1.5min taking full table from MX480 (nice RE, 85k updates) > ~3min from 7600 (old and slow RE, 89k updates) > almost 5min from ASR9k (nice RE, 450k updates) > > It'll be even more noticeable when Junos will be able to run rpd on a > dedicated core. > > > > Keep in mind that it's still not actual convergence time, Junos is still > lagging with FIB updates long after that. > > Sadly I was unable to find my old convergence test numbers but krt queue > was dissipating for at least couple of minutes after BGP converged. I case > you're wondering if it was the known rpd bug with low krt priority - no, I > tested it after it was fixed. Not that I'd call it "fixed". > > And that's what I don't like about MX-es :-) Not sure if it's faster or > slower on ASR9k though. > > > On 02.12.2015 12:30, James Bensley wrote: > >> On 1 December 2015 at 17:29, Stepan Kucherenko <t...@megagroup.ru> wrote: >> >>> My biggest gripe with ASR9k (or IOS XR in particular) is that Cisco >>> stopped >>> grouping BGP prefixes in one update if they have same attributes so it's >>> one >>> prefix per update now (or sometimes two). >>> >>> Transit ISP we tested it with pinged TAC and got a response that it's >>> "software/hardware limitation" and nothing can be done. >>> >>> I don't know when this regression happened but now taking full feed from >>> ASR9k is almost twice as slow as taking it from 7600 with weak RE and 3-4 >>> times slower than taking it from MX. >>> >>> I'm not joking, test it yourself. Just look at the traffic dump. As I >>> understand it, it's not an edge case so you must see it as well. >>> >>> In my case it was 450k updates per 514k prefixes for full feed from >>> ASR9k, >>> 89k updates per 510k prefixes from 7600 and 85k updates per 516k prefixes >>> from MX480. Huge difference. >>> >>> It's not a show stopper but I'm sure it must be a significant impact on >>> convergence time. >>> >> >> How long timewise is it taking you to converge? >> >> Last time I bounced a BGP session to a full table provider it took sub >> 1 minute to take in all the routes. I wasn't actually timing so I >> don't know how long exactly. >> >> Cheers, >> James. >> _______________________________________________ >> juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net >> https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp >> >> _______________________________________________ > juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net > https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp > _______________________________________________ juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp