|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| home | help | back | first | fref | pref | prev | next | nref | lref | last | post |
In-Reply-To: <4D35FEAC.9040705@brightok.net> Date: Tue, 18 Jan 2011 16:03:04 -0500 From: Jack Carrozzo <jack@crepinc.com> To: Jack Bates <jbates@brightok.net> Cc: ayousuf0079@gmail.com, nanog group <nanog@nanog.org> Errors-To: nanog-bounces+nanog.discuss=bloom-picayune.mit.edu@nanog.org 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
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| home | help | back | first | fref | pref | prev | next | nref | lref | last | post |