[63997] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: Extreme BlackDiamond
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Jason LeBlanc)
Mon Oct 13 18:41:24 2003
Date: Mon, 13 Oct 2003 18:07:04 -0400
From: Jason LeBlanc <jml@packetpimp.org>
To: "Tom (UnitedLayer)" <tom@unitedlayer.com>
Cc: sthaug@nethelp.no, nanog@merit.edu
In-Reply-To: <20031013141249.X38950-100000@smtp.unitedlayer.com>
Errors-To: owner-nanog-outgoing@merit.edu
bgp scanner cpu usage == number of neighbors * number of routes in table
lots of neighbors would cause this, for longer periods. If running
SUP1A/MSFC this could be worse than with MSFC2 (slightly more CPU
power), and much worse than SUP2 I'm guessing.
Tom (UnitedLayer) wrote:
>On Mon, 13 Oct 2003 sthaug@nethelp.no wrote:
>
>
>>Maybe you could expand on the BGP scanner problems - we haven't seen
>>them all the time we've been running 6500 native with full routes (about
>>1.5 years now).
>>
>>
>
>BGP Scanner taking up close to 100% of CPU on a box periodically.
>GSR doesn't seem to do it, but a buncha other cisco boxes do.
>Its more irritating than anything else, especially when customers complain
>that when they traceroute they see ~200ms latency to the router...
>
>
