[157099] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: max-prefix and platform tcam limits: they are things
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Jon Lewis)
Fri Oct 5 20:26:31 2012
Date: Fri, 5 Oct 2012 20:25:57 -0400 (EDT)
From: Jon Lewis <jlewis@lewis.org>
To: jim deleskie <deleskie@gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CAJL_ZMM1FYske=QoHf7KzxZMZmc5YMaSDnk8Lo1fSxxds18fTw@mail.gmail.com>
Cc: Nanog <nanog@nanog.org>
Errors-To: nanog-bounces+nanog.discuss=bloom-picayune.mit.edu@nanog.org
On Fri, 5 Oct 2012, jim deleskie wrote:
> I know that I should know better then comment on networks others then
> my own, ( and I know to never comment on my own publicly :) )
>
>
> But here goes, 210x the size of normal really? 210% I'd have a hard
> time believing. Did anyone else anywhere see a route leak equal to
> larger then the entire Internet that day, anywhere else that could of
> caused this?
Is it plausible that Godaddy's internal network only normally has a few
thousand BGP routes? 210 x a few thousand would run most modern gear out
of FIB space.
The "my DNS is broken, are we really being DDoS'd on udp/53 at the same
time?" thing, I've seen, and I can imagine it being very confusing to
someone seeing it for the first time.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Jon Lewis, MCP :) | I route
Senior Network Engineer | therefore you are
Atlantic Net |
_________ http://www.lewis.org/~jlewis/pgp for PGP public key_________
