[99193] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: Route table growth and hardware limits...talk to the filter
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Randy Bush)
Sun Sep 9 02:42:35 2007
Date: Sun, 09 Sep 2007 12:11:19 +0530
From: Randy Bush <randy@psg.com>
To: Tony Li <tony.li@tony.li>
CC: Forrest <forrest@almighty.c64.org>, nanog@nanog.org
In-Reply-To: <7784CAE2-77B4-48B5-A26B-E19776D7E663@tony.li>
Errors-To: owner-nanog@merit.edu
> If you do save it in your BRIB, then you can do this filtering between
> RIB and FIB. That turns out to be a completely local feature, requiring
> no protocol changes or additions whatsoever, and thus does not even
> require an RFC or Internet draft. This feature has been seen in some
> circles under the name "ORIB". Ask YFRV's PM for it. ;-)
>
> Note that this feature *is* CPU intensive. This also does not decrease
> the RP RAM usage the way that update filtering would. In fact, due to
> the overhead of tracking filtered and non-filtered prefixes, there is
> additional RP RAM usage. YMMV.
so, bottom line, no help other than reducing fib?
randy
