"Turbo FIB" is an internal Juniper name for some speed optimizations in a version of the 15.1F6 code base, that only work on 64-bit REs. The test results I saw (a powerpoint presentation) showed a greater than 10% speed increase from the previous release for installing prefixes into the FIB from RIB. I don't know if this is a public release yet, I will ask our SE team. I didn't pay close attention because we don't have any 64-bit REs yet.
On Fri, Jul 29, 2016 at 12:36 AM, Giuliano Medalha <giuli...@wztech.com.br> wrote: > Hello James > > What do you mean with turbo fib ? > > Is a new config from 15.1 ? > > Thanks a lot > > Giuliano > > > > > > > I saw test results from the latest 15.1 with "turbo fib" on RE-1800 that > can do convergence of multiple feed full table in about 55 seconds. And > that is still a single core RPD process. > > > >> On Jul 28, 2016, at 2:34 PM, Matthew Crocker <matt...@corp.crocker.com> > wrote: > >> > >> > >> Mike, > >> > >> Here is the view of my MX80. This router has a couple full tables and > a bunch of peers through various IXes. I have an MX480 on order to > replace this MX80. I’ll use this a dedicated IX peering router so I won’t > have full tables on my IX border later this year. > >> > >> The MX80 has horrific full table convergence (8 minutes +/-). The > MX104 is a bit better. You would need to go to a MX240 with a real RE to > get decent convergence times. > >> > >> matthew@MX80> show bgp summary > >> Groups: 10 Peers: 15 Down peers: 0 > >> > >> matthew@MX80> show route summary > >> Autonomous system number: XXXX > >> Router ID: A.B.C.D > >> > >> inet.0: 614169 destinations, 1807913 routes (614160 active, 10 > holddown, 0 hidden) > >> Restart Complete > >> Direct: 7 routes, 7 active > >> Local: 6 routes, 6 active > >> OSPF: 511 routes, 508 active > >> BGP: 1807386 routes, 613636 active > >> Static: 1 routes, 1 active > >> LDP: 2 routes, 2 active > >> > >> inet6.0: 14443 destinations, 28877 routes (14443 active, 0 holddown, 0 > hidden) > >> Restart Complete > >> Direct: 6 routes, 4 active > >> Local: 6 routes, 6 active > >> BGP: 28865 routes, 14433 active > >> > >> > >> matthew@MX80> show system memory > >> System memory usage distribution: > >> Total memory: 2072576 Kbytes (100%) > >> Reserved memory: 36896 Kbytes ( 1%) > >> Wired memory: 302092 Kbytes ( 14%) > >> Active memory: 1399432 Kbytes ( 67%) > >> Inactive memory: 120000 Kbytes ( 5%) > >> Cache memory: 69720 Kbytes ( 3%) > >> Free memory: 143680 Kbytes ( 6%) > >> Memory disk resident memory: 349640 Kbytes > >> VM-Kbytes( % ) Resident( % ) Map-name > >> 913972(87.16) 343424(16.56) kernel > >> > >> matthew@MX80> show system processes summary > >> last pid: 34226; load averages: 0.24, 0.31, 0.23 up 477+00:51:09 > 18:31:50 > >> 142 processes: 4 running, 110 sleeping, 28 waiting > >> > >> Mem: 1367M Active, 117M Inact, 295M Wired, 68M Cache, 112M Buf, 140M > Free > >> Swap: 2915M Total, 2915M Free > >> > >> > >> — > >> > >> Matthew Crocker > >> President - Crocker Communications, Inc. > >> Managing Partner - Crocker Telecommunications, LLC > >> E: matt...@corp.crocker.com > >> E: matt...@crocker.com > >> > >> > >>> On Jul 28, 2016, at 12:09 PM, Mike <mike+j...@willitsonline.com> > wrote: > >>> > >>> On 07/28/2016 12:50 AM, Adam Vitkovsky wrote: > >>>> > >>>> And on how effective is the NPU's lookup process, that is how > effective is the actual lookup algorithm with CPU cycles and memory > accesses, some NPUs can even offload complex lookup tasks to a specialized > chip. > >>> > >>> I appreciate your presence on other forums, but I'm pretty sure nobody > here needs a basic explanation of how modern router platforms work. If you > missed it, the question was specifically about juniper and bang for the > buck and routing bgp on 10g and filtering. > >>> > >>> Some folks helpfully suggested using strategies to to decrease the > required size of the FIB, potentially meaning a lower box could do that > job. That has some merit, as the OP was right in that for this job I don't > really care about timbuktu more as whats 'close' to my two ip transit > providers. I know nothing of juniper and I'm just wondering if MX80 is > enough box for this or if I need to go higher up in the food chain. The one > iptransit provider at my 'A' location appears to originate about 20 > networks from various netblocks and this would be easy to statically enter > into config while accepting defaults from both, achieving the same net > result. > >>> > >>> Mike- > >>> _______________________________________________ > >>> 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 > -- Jim Troutman, jamesltrout...@gmail.com 800-605-0192 (main) _______________________________________________ juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsp@puck.nether.net https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp