Here is a trick I learned. I couldn't believe how many prefixes I learned with a /25-/30. Most of these also had /16 or /24 which covered the larger prefixes. I wanted limit the number of prefixes will prefixes longer than /24.
router bgp AS# neighbor X.X.X.X prefix-list NoSmall in ! ! ip prefix-list NoSmall seq 10 permit 0.0.0.0/0 le 24 then clear ip bgp X.X.X.X soft in ^-^-^-^-^-^-^-^-^-^-^ Bill Carter CCIE 5022 ^-^-^-^-^-^-^-^-^-^-^ -----Original Message----- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of John Neiberger Sent: Friday, October 05, 2001 4:20 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: OT: Multihomed full routes on a 3640? [7:22269] Yes, I am the King of the Off Topic Post lately. I apologize. I've checked the archives and I didn't see anything recent on this. Besides, what I did find was a bunch of disagreements and I wasn't able to come to a conclusion. Here's the situation: We are multihomed to two providers using a 3640 with 128MB of RAM. Earlier today I was taking customer routes from both (37,000 and 8,500 respectively.) I had 87MB of RAM free so I thought I'd allow the second provider to send me full routes. After changing that I still have 57MB of RAM free. So, an increase of 96,000 routes only decreased my available RAM by around 30MB. Now I'm considering allowing the other provider who is already sending 37,000 routes to send a full table, as well. Am I asking for trouble by accepting full routes from two providers with this setup? It seems to me that adding another 70k routes from the first provider would only use up another 20MB of RAM or so, leaving about 30MB to play with. Would you agree that this is enough wiggle room or should I leave it alone now and play it safe? Thanks, John Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7&i=22279&t=22269 -------------------------------------------------- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
