Which routers support BGP4?
Paul Ferguson
>Bay Networks sell a access router - The Access Node that
>supports BGP4. It has 1 ethernet and two Syncs with an optional
>port that can support ISDN or a third sync or a second Enet.
>
>
Regardless of what type of router is used, you will still need >16Mb of
memory to carry *full* Internet routing with BGP(4).
As has already been mentioned several times, it might be possible to
take *partial* routing on a router with 16Mb, but it greatly depends
on the arrangements made with your upstream peer(s).
- paul
--
Paul Ferguson || ||
Consulting Engineering || ||
Reston, Virginia USA |||| ||||
tel: +1.703.716.9538 ..:||||||:..:||||||:..
e-mail: pfer...@cisco.com c i s c o S y s t e m s
Brett Frankenberger
Chris Collura <cbco...@usa.pipeline.com> wrote:
>Bay Networks sell a access router - The Access Node that
>supports BGP4. It has 1 ethernet and two Syncs with an optional
>port that can support ISDN or a third sync or a second Enet.
It has a max of 16MB of RAM. though. I can't see anyway you could take
full routing with that amount of RAM.
It's probably work for partial routing. If you want full routing,
you'll need at a minimum a 32MB ASN (from Bay's product line ... or
something from Cisco's product line with over 16MB of ram, or ...)
--
- Brett (bre...@netcom.com)
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
... Coming soon to a | Brett Frankenberger
.sig near you ... a Humorous Quote ... | bre...@netcom.com
Bob Meindl
up to 32 MB of RAM although less is needed if policies are used to
limit the size of the table.
Bob
Nesta Stubbs/Craig Brozefsky
Paul Ferguson <pfer...@cisco.com> wrote:
>You'll not be able to take _full_ routing with a 2500; you may be able to
>take _partial_ routing on one link and default on the other, but it really
>depends on the size of your upstream provider's internal routing, and any
>special arrangements for specific routing.
>
>BGP routing is available on the 25xx, 4x00, and 7xxx platforms.
We are using a 2511 currently and want to multi-home between two NSPs.
I have some concerns about the capability of the 2511 handling two T1s
plus properly holding route tables for the two upstream providers.
What would you suggest we use to be able to take full routing if the
2500 series can't hold it. What about after the memory expansion?
some other questions with regards to BGP4 and Cisco products:
How much memory would be needed to hold full routing for a multi-homed
host connected to two NSPs (nap.net and uu.net for example)?
Can a 2500 series router handle the traffic from two T1's without
queuing problems or dropping?
If I do have to have only partial routing and default to the other
what performance will I get and what type of redundancy if any?
--
Nesta Stubbs "Betsy, can you find the Pentagon for me?
Cynico Network Consulting It has five sides and a big parking lot"
ne...@cynico.com -Fred McMurray-
Paul Ferguson
>
>We are using a 2511 currently and want to multi-home between two NSPs.
>I have some concerns about the capability of the 2511 handling two T1s
>plus properly holding route tables for the two upstream providers.
>What would you suggest we use to be able to take full routing if the
>2500 series can't hold it. What about after the memory expansion?
>
A 4500 with 32Mb.
>some other questions with regards to BGP4 and Cisco products:
>
>How much memory would be needed to hold full routing for a multi-homed
>host connected to two NSPs (nap.net and uu.net for example)?
>
Full routing, at the moment, occupies ~20Mb of memory (~34k routes).
>Can a 2500 series router handle the traffic from two T1's without
>queuing problems or dropping?
>
Yes.
>If I do have to have only partial routing and default to the other
>what performance will I get and what type of redundancy if any?
If you use this model, then when you have a specific route for a
specific prefix, it will route via the peer from where the route
propagated. If you do not have a specific route for a certain prefix,
then it will route via the peer from where you are pointing default.
If you lose the link where you receiving partial routing via BGP,
everything will route via default.
If you loose the link where you are pointing default, you will only
have routes for the prefixes which you are receiving partial routing.
One method to get around this is to point default across both links,
however, attach an administrative distance for one of them which is
higher than the preferred default.
- paul
>--
>Nesta Stubbs "Betsy, can you find the Pentagon for me?
>Cynico Network Consulting It has five sides and a big parking lot"
>ne...@cynico.com -Fred McMurray-
>
--
Nesta Stubbs/Craig Brozefsky
> At 12:13 PM 3/23/96 -0600, Nesta Stubbs/Craig Brozefsky wrote:
>
> A 4500 with 32Mb.
thanx for such a speedy reply.
>
> Full routing, at the moment, occupies ~20Mb of memory (~34k routes).
>
I guess that means we'll be doing partial routing until we upgrade the
2511, or I could have the 2511 hold a full routing table for the T1 into
it, and have the ACC Amazon we have hold a full routing table to the
other T1. Then have the 2511 be the default gateway for our internal
machine and then it would have a default route pointing to the amazon for
those routes not covered by the T1 it has, and the Amazon will send it
out the second T1. But that may not work if there are some routes that
are not covered by either of the "full routing tables" on either of the
machines. Plus that damn ACC doesn't have BGP4 yet so we'de have to wait
till their next software upgrade which will include it. I personally
would prefer to have a cisco acting as our core, but splitting up the
T1's between machines gives us more redundancy.
> >Can a 2500 series router handle the traffic from two T1's without
> >queuing problems or dropping?
> >
>
> Yes.
that's reassuring.
> If you use this model, then when you have a specific route for a
> specific prefix, it will route via the peer from where the route
> propagated. If you do not have a specific route for a certain prefix,
> then it will route via the peer from where you are pointing default.
>
> If you lose the link where you receiving partial routing via BGP,
> everything will route via default.
>
> If you loose the link where you are pointing default, you will only
> have routes for the prefixes which you are receiving partial routing.
> One method to get around this is to point default across both links,
> however, attach an administrative distance for one of them which is
> higher than the preferred default.
>
thanx again for the hints.