nanog mailing list archives
Re: Getting a BGP table in to a lab
From: Arnold Nipper <arnold () nipper de>
Date: Thu, 21 Apr 2005 23:08:38 +0200
On 21.04.2005 17:17 Reeves, Rob wrote
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 BGP peers, it may start intermittently flapping BGP sessions, or even justcrash the bgpd process entirely.
For what numbers? I've two quaggas, ~150 peers each, doing as-path and *full* prefix filtering for each peer (Config is around 9MB). CPU is idle 99.x% mostly ...
Arnold -- Arnold Nipper, AN45
Current thread:
- RE: Getting a BGP table in to a lab, (continued)
- RE: Getting a BGP table in to a lab Bill Nash (Apr 20)
- RE: Getting a BGP table in to a lab Scott Morris (Apr 20)
- Re: Getting a BGP table in to a lab eric-list-nanog (Apr 20)
- Re: Getting a BGP table in to a lab Steven M. Bellovin (Apr 21)
- Re: Getting a BGP table in to a lab Nathan Ward (Apr 21)
- Re: Getting a BGP table in to a lab Nathan Ward (Apr 21)
- RE: Getting a BGP table in to a lab Fergie (Paul Ferguson) (Apr 20)
- RE: Getting a BGP table in to a lab Frotzler, Florian (Apr 21)
- RE: Getting a BGP table in to a lab Reeves, Rob (Apr 21)
- Re: Getting a BGP table in to a lab Okan Demirmen (Apr 21)
- Re: Getting a BGP table in to a lab Arnold Nipper (Apr 21)
- Re: Getting a BGP table in to a lab Andre Oppermann (Apr 21)
- Re: Getting a BGP table in to a lab Daniel Roesen (Apr 21)
- RE: Getting a BGP table in to a lab Reeves, Rob (Apr 21)