[190309] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: 1GE L3 aggregation
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Owen DeLong)
Thu Jun 23 02:07:17 2016
X-Original-To: nanog@nanog.org
From: Owen DeLong <owen@delong.com>
In-Reply-To: <CAOT81N9jd4ppkYPvBj9GHvH+3icLaR86YA6cB79wKytSmV8j2A@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 22 Jun 2016 23:07:10 -0700
To: David Charlebois <dcharlebois@gmail.com>
Cc: nanog@nanog.org
Errors-To: nanog-bounces@nanog.org
If it=E2=80=99s 100% for redundancy, why not just ECMP defaults and not =
take a full table?
That will allow you to use a MUCH cheaper router with a much simpler =
configuration.
Owen
> On Jun 22, 2016, at 13:04 , David Charlebois <dcharlebois@gmail.com> =
wrote:
>=20
> Hello
> I'm curious about the overall recommendation when selecting a small =
class
> BGP router for IPv6 (with 1gig ports). We can see the current IPv4 =
routing
> table is around 615k routes and the IPv6 routing table is sitting =
around
> ~31k routes.
>=20
> In our case, we advertise a single /24 from our head office to 2 =
upstream
> providers. The routing is %100 for redundancy.
>=20
> Somebody mentioned that the Brocade CER-RT was once a best seller. =
Brocade
> are now offering the CER 4X-RT version at 256K IPv6 routes supported =
(1.5M
> IPv4 routes). We don't have immediate plans for IPv6, but I do foresee =
this
> in a few year. Question is - is 256k IPv6 routes suitable?
>=20
> Thanks
> Dave
