Amazing fact: Come back to this talks about BGP and memory, I calculated the size of total BGP information in the 'show ip bgp' cisco output. No doubt, it's not all attributes printed here, but on the other hand it's the text view, not the binary presentation. Results are: 118113 lines 10065161 bytes (10Mb) 100 bytes/route , in the text form, average. Compare to 65955 network entries and 159898 paths using 12154642 bytes of memory 31322 BGP path attribute entries using 2800660 bytes of memory 14718 BGP route-map cache entries using 235488 bytes of memory 1712 BGP filter-list cache entries using 27392 bytes of memory 178 received paths for inbound soft reconfiguration BGP activity 540738/474776 prefixes, 5007746/4847848 paths 3037709 prefixes revised. and note - this is BINARY form... No, if someone want to implement the core BGP in the 8 MB ram, he can do it as well (through the cost of his work + cost of debug should be much greater than the cost of 128RAM memory -:)). Aleksei Roudnev, Network Operations Center, Relcom, Moscow (+7 095) 194-19-95 (Network Operations Center Hot Line),(+7 095) 230-41-41, N 13729 (pager) (+7 095) 196-72-12 (Support), (+7 095) 194-33-28 (Fax)
I think you are forgetting that these routes need to be stored in a data structure that allows fast queries as well as fast inserts and deletes. That index takes space, and your "sh ip bgp" doesn't show you that. Yeah, let's store the routing table in a linked list! -Phil
No, if someone want to implement the core BGP in the 8 MB ram, he can do it as well (through the cost of his work + cost of debug should be much greater than the cost of 128RAM memory -:)).
Aleksei Roudnev, Network Operations Center, Relcom, Moscow (+7 095) 194-19-95 (Network Operations Center Hot Line),(+7 095) 230-41-41, N 1 3729 (pager) (+7 095) 196-72-12 (Support), (+7 095) 194-33-28 (Fax)
Phillip Vandry wrote:
I think you are forgetting that these routes need to be stored in a data structure that allows fast queries as well as fast inserts and deletes. That index takes space, and your "sh ip bgp" doesn't show you that.
Yeah, let's store the routing table in a linked list!
Actually, that isn't that crazy... There's quite a bit of silicon out there that can read link lists very fast (fast enough to paint video frames as an example)... But I suppose we're talking about processor-based (software) routing for the most part.. Ryan Brooks ryan@inc.net
-Phil
No, if someone want to implement the core BGP in the 8 MB ram, he can do it as well (through the cost of his work + cost of debug should be much greater than the cost of 128RAM memory -:)).
Aleksei Roudnev, Network Operations Center, Relcom, Moscow (+7 095) 194-19-95 (Network Operations Center Hot Line),(+7 095) 230-41-41, N 1 3729 (pager) (+7 095) 196-72-12 (Support), (+7 095) 194-33-28 (Fax)
Sorry, I did not want to blame any developer; I only notified that even text presentation of this tables get less memory then the structures in the router. Due to Bill (MS really can't work withouth the heaps of the memory) memory became the cheap gift this days (talking about the memory for the BGP tables, not the fast switch buffers memory). -:) Regards, alex. On Wed, 13 Oct 1999, Ryan K. Brooks wrote:
Date: Wed, 13 Oct 1999 12:35:27 -0500 From: Ryan K. Brooks <ryan@inc.net> To: Phillip Vandry <vandry@Mlink.NET> Cc: Alex P. Rudnev <alex@virgin.relcom.eu.net>, nanog@merit.edu Subject: Re: BGP and memory
Phillip Vandry wrote:
I think you are forgetting that these routes need to be stored in a data structure that allows fast queries as well as fast inserts and deletes. That index takes space, and your "sh ip bgp" doesn't show you that.
Yeah, let's store the routing table in a linked list!
Actually, that isn't that crazy... There's quite a bit of silicon out there that can read link lists very fast (fast enough to paint video frames as an example)... But I suppose we're talking about processor-based (software) routing for the most part..
Ryan Brooks ryan@inc.net
-Phil
No, if someone want to implement the core BGP in the 8 MB ram, he can do it as well (through the cost of his work + cost of debug should be much greater than the cost of 128RAM memory -:)).
Aleksei Roudnev, Network Operations Center, Relcom, Moscow (+7 095) 194-19-95 (Network Operations Center Hot Line),(+7 095) 230-41-41, N 1 3729 (pager) (+7 095) 196-72-12 (Support), (+7 095) 194-33-28 (Fax)
Aleksei Roudnev, Network Operations Center, Relcom, Moscow (+7 095) 194-19-95 (Network Operations Center Hot Line),(+7 095) 230-41-41, N 13729 (pager) (+7 095) 196-72-12 (Support), (+7 095) 194-33-28 (Fax)
On Wed, 13 Oct 1999, Phillip Vandry wrote:
I think you are forgetting that these routes need to be stored in a data structure that allows fast queries as well as fast inserts and deletes. That index takes space, and your "sh ip bgp" doesn't show you that.
Doesn't Livingston/Lucent claim to be able to handle several full views in 32mb? What are they leaving out? ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Jon Lewis *jlewis@lewis.org*| Spammers will be winnuked or System Administrator | nestea'd...whatever it takes Atlantic Net | to get the job done. _________http://www.lewis.org/~jlewis/pgp for PGP public key__________
participants (4)
-
Alex P. Rudnev -
jlewis＠lewis.org -
Phillip Vandry -
Ryan K. Brooks