[80032] in North American Network Operators' Group
AW: Getting a BGP table in to a lab
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (John van Oppen)
Thu Apr 21 17:25:27 2005
Date: Thu, 21 Apr 2005 14:24:59 -0700
From: "John van Oppen" <john@vanoppen.com>
To: "Arnold Nipper" <arnold@nipper.de>,
"Reeves, Rob" <rreeves@arbinet.com>
Cc: <nanog@merit.edu>
Errors-To: owner-nanog@merit.edu
I agree... I have around 75 peers on a box that actually does the =
routing running quagga, and there appears to be no problem. My only =
issues have been with version upgrades having bugs in them, but those =
problems are due to my inadequate testing. I also utilize supervise =
scripts (daemontools)to keep all the=20
The best feature is being able to use the same route maps I use on my =
cisco boxes.
John :)
-----Urspr=FCngliche Nachricht-----
Von: Arnold Nipper [mailto:arnold@nipper.de]=20
Gesendet: Thursday, April 21, 2005 2:09 PM
An: Reeves, Rob
Cc: nanog@merit.edu
Betreff: Re: Getting a BGP table in to a lab
On 21.04.2005 17:17 Reeves, Rob wrote
>=20
> Quagga is great for smaller implementations, but it doesn't scale very =
> well. It eats up a lot of CPU, so once you hit a certain number of=20
> BGP peers, it may start intermittently flapping BGP sessions, or even=20
> just crash the bgpd process entirely.
For what numbers? I've two quaggas, ~150 peers each, doing as-path and=20
*full* prefix filtering for each peer (Config is around 9MB). CPU is=20
idle 99.x% mostly ...
Arnold
--=20
Arnold Nipper, AN45
