On Fri, Nov 27, 2009 at 4:27 AM, Rod Whitworth <glis...@witworx.com> wrote:
> On Fri, 27 Nov 2009 03:06:59 +0700, ~Lst wrote:
>
>>Hi,
>>
>>I've already setup bgplg on my test machine, but only show version,
>>ping and traceroute that is work (suggested from
>>http://marc.info/?l=openbsd-misc&m=122670411001369&w=2).
>>Everything else is not work, such as show ip bgp memory, etc...
>>I followed man pages and checked everything but still its only failed,
>>the strange is everytime I tested from CLI it works fine but not if I
>>tested from the web.
>>Is there anything that I don't know ?
>>
>>-bash-4.0# /var/www/bin/bgpctl show ip bgp memory
>>RDE memory statistics
>>    299625 IPv4 network entries using 6.9M of memory
>>    599250 rib entries using 18.3M of memory
>>    599250 prefix entries using 18.3M of memory
>>    106974 BGP path attribute entries using 7.8M of memory
>>     46163 BGP AS-PATH attribute entries using 2.1M of memory,
>>           and holding 106974 references
>>      8164 BGP attributes entries using 191K of memory
>>           and holding 126530 references
>>      8163 BGP attributes using 149K of memory
>>RIB using 53.6M of memory
>>
>>
>>Rgds,
>>--
>>~Lst
>>
>
> Here is the output from the web access on a router I administer:
> RDE memory statistics
>      7793 IPv4 network entries using 244K of memory
>      2279 IPv6 network entries using 97.9K of memory
>     21902 prefix entries using 684K of memory
>      7050 BGP path attribute entries using 551K of memory
>      3963 BGP AS-PATH attribute entries using 140K of memory,
>           and holding 7050 references
>       564 BGP attributes entries using 13.2K of memory
>           and holding 7160 references
>       563 BGP attributes using 8.3K of memory
> RIB using 1.7M of memory
>
> success.
> ===============
>
> Looks OK to me. I don't know what misconfiguration may be possible but
> I thought you'd at least like to know that bgplg is capable of doing
> it.
> That gives you a pointer to look elsewhere than bgplg itself.
> HTH,
>

Yes, I know. If it's wrong via web, it should be the cmd show version
didn't work too.
Did I miss the configuration ?


Rgds,
--
~Lst

Reply via email to