[138553] in North American Network Operators' Group
RE: Internet Edge Router replacement - IPv6 route table
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (George Bonser)
Wed Mar 9 22:01:49 2011
Date: Wed, 9 Mar 2011 19:00:57 -0800
In-Reply-To: <EA18C488-CD9F-44DD-B605-D7BF8E964F55@semihuman.com>
From: "George Bonser" <gbonser@seven.com>
To: "Chris Woodfield" <rekoil@semihuman.com>
Cc: nanog@nanog.org
Errors-To: nanog-bounces+nanog.discuss=bloom-picayune.mit.edu@nanog.org
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Chris Woodfield [mailto:rekoil@semihuman.com]
> Sent: Wednesday, March 09, 2011 6:11 PM
> To: Chris Enger
> Cc: 'jgoodwin@studio442.com.au'; 'nanog@nanog.org'
> Subject: Re: Internet Edge Router replacement - IPv6 route table
> sizeconsiderations
>=20
> I think this is the point where I get a shovel, a bullwhip and head
> over to the horse graveyard that is CAM optimization...
>=20
> -C
>=20
Well, it really isn't so bad. With Brocade FPGA gear you can change how
much CAM is allocated to different functions (but you can't do it on the
fly, it takes a reboot). I don't think these are available for the CER
series, though. The MLX or MXR can be reconfigured. The thing is that
the XMR and MLX are not ASIC-based devices, they are FPGA-based which
means the hardware can be re-wired with a code change. Personally, I
like to be able to reallocate CAM from features I am not using to
features that I am using.
And to be fair, Brocade has been improving over the past couple of
years. Now if only we could route layer 3 on MCT VLANS ...
(MCT is sort of like Arista mLAG but it is layer2 only at this point).
