nanog mailing list archives
Re: Dual Homed BGP for failover
From: Jack Carrozzo <jack () crepinc com>
Date: Tue, 18 Jan 2011 16:03:04 -0500
On Tue, Jan 18, 2011 at 3:57 PM, Jack Bates <jbates () brightok net> wrote:
You should still be careful, as most processors keep a copy of filtered routes as well, so while your forwarding table may not increase, your route processor memory most likely will.
I don't think this is the case, on IOS at least. Some years ago I was rocking some 7500s with $not_enough ram for multiple full tables, but with a prefix list to accept le 23 they worked fine. -Jack Carrozzo
Current thread:
- Dual Homed BGP for failover Ahmed Yousuf (Jan 18)
- Re: Dual Homed BGP for failover Jack Carrozzo (Jan 18)
- Re: Dual Homed BGP for failover Max Pierson (Jan 18)
- RE: Dual Homed BGP for failover George Bonser (Jan 18)
- Re: Dual Homed BGP for failover William Herrin (Jan 18)
- Re: Dual Homed BGP for failover Jack Bates (Jan 18)
- RE: Dual Homed BGP for failover Brandon Kim (Jan 18)
- RE: Dual Homed BGP for failover George Bonser (Jan 18)
- Re: Dual Homed BGP for failover Jack Bates (Jan 18)
- Re: Dual Homed BGP for failover Jack Carrozzo (Jan 18)
- Re: Dual Homed BGP for failover Jack Bates (Jan 18)
- Re: Dual Homed BGP for failover Jack Carrozzo (Jan 18)
- Re: Dual Homed BGP for failover Max Pierson (Jan 18)
- RE: Dual Homed BGP for failover Ahmed Yousuf (Jan 19)
- RE: Dual Homed BGP for failover Randy McAnally (Jan 19)
- RE: Dual Homed BGP for failover Ahmed Yousuf (Jan 19)
- RE: Dual Homed BGP for failover Randy McAnally (Jan 19)
- Re: Dual Homed BGP for failover Jack Bates (Jan 18)
- Re: Dual Homed BGP for failover Michel de Nostredame (Jan 18)
- Re: Dual Homed BGP for failover Randy Carpenter (Jan 18)