nanog mailing list archives
Re: Extreme BlackDiamond
From: Jason LeBlanc <jml () packetpimp org>
Date: Mon, 13 Oct 2003 18:07:04 -0400
bgp scanner cpu usage == number of neighbors * number of routes in tablelots of neighbors would cause this, for longer periods. If running SUP1A/MSFC this could be worse than with MSFC2 (slightly more CPU power), and much worse than SUP2 I'm guessing.
Tom (UnitedLayer) wrote:
On Mon, 13 Oct 2003 sthaug () nethelp no wrote:Maybe you could expand on the BGP scanner problems - we haven't seen them all the time we've been running 6500 native with full routes (about 1.5 years now).BGP Scanner taking up close to 100% of CPU on a box periodically. GSR doesn't seem to do it, but a buncha other cisco boxes do. Its more irritating than anything else, especially when customers complain that when they traceroute they see ~200ms latency to the router...
Current thread:
- Re: Extreme BlackDiamond, (continued)
- Re: Extreme BlackDiamond Nipper, Arnold (Oct 13)
- Re: Extreme BlackDiamond Niels Bakker (Oct 13)
- Re: Extreme BlackDiamond Tom (UnitedLayer) (Oct 13)
- RE: Extreme BlackDiamond sthaug (Oct 13)
- RE: Extreme BlackDiamond Tom (UnitedLayer) (Oct 13)
- Re: Extreme BlackDiamond Steve Francis (Oct 13)
- Re: Extreme BlackDiamond Tom (UnitedLayer) (Oct 13)
- Re: Extreme BlackDiamond Bradley Dunn (Oct 13)
- Re: Extreme BlackDiamond Peter E. Fry (Oct 14)
- Re: Extreme BlackDiamond Richard A Steenbergen (Oct 13)
- Re: Extreme BlackDiamond Jason LeBlanc (Oct 13)
- RE: Extreme BlackDiamond Mikael Abrahamsson (Oct 14)
- Re: Extreme BlackDiamond Suresh Ramasubramanian (Oct 15)
- Re: Extreme BlackDiamond Joe Rhett (Oct 15)
- Re: Extreme BlackDiamond Suresh Ramasubramanian (Oct 15)