[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
max-prefix and platform tcam limits: they are things
- Subject: max-prefix and platform tcam limits: they are things
- From: hank at efes.iucc.ac.il (Hank Nussbacher)
- Date: Sat, 6 Oct 2012 22:02:35 +0200 (IST)
- In-reply-to: <CAJL_ZMP=Q0z3zaEuebk-_T9YhVNG_ouWDm+gf14sbprZQaJCiw@mail.gmail.com>
- References: <CAJWBqEs1C3_XwKt2m+RqONwStPt4zCGXEk+Li7wt+N6YbFydzg@mail.gmail.com> <CAJL_ZMM1FYske=QoHf7KzxZMZmc5YMaSDnk8Lo1fSxxds18fTw@mail.gmail.com> <[email protected]> <CAJL_ZMP=Q0z3zaEuebk-_T9YhVNG_ouWDm+gf14sbprZQaJCiw@mail.gmail.com>
On Fri, 5 Oct 2012, jim deleskie wrote:
Just ask yourself how many times you have seen a Godaddy IP/NOC person
post anything to NANOG or to any other technical forum?
-Hank
> Yes that math would work, but if your device can't handle 1x Internet
> routing and your running without some serious max-prefix/filters it
> says even more about your IP eng team then I'd be willing to comment
> on.
>
> -jim
>
> On Fri, Oct 5, 2012 at 9:17 PM, <Valdis.Kletnieks at vt.edu> wrote:
>> On Fri, 05 Oct 2012 21:05:07 -0300, jim deleskie said:
>>
>>> 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?
>>
>> If the device was only expecting 2K or so internal routes, getting hit with
>> the 440K routes in the DFZ would be 210x....
>