Re: External BGP Controller for L3 Switch BGP routing

[Josh Reynolds <josh () kyneticwifi com>]

I'm going to be keeping a close eye on this:

http://blogs.cisco.com/sp/a-bigger-helping-of-internet-please

On Jan 16, 2017 1:03 AM, "Yucong Sun" <sunyucong () gmail com> wrote:

> In my setup, I use an BIRD instance to combine multiple internet full
> tables,  i use some filter to generate some override route to send to my L3
> switch to do routing.  The L3 switch is configured with the default route
> to the main transit provider , if BIRD is down, the route would be
> unoptimized, but everything else remain operable until i fixed that BIRD
> instance.
>
> I've asked around about why there isn't a L3 switch capable of handling
> full tables, I really don't understand the difference/logic behind it.
>
> On Sun, Jan 15, 2017 at 10:43 PM Tore Anderson <tore () fud no> wrote:
>
> > Hi Saku,
> >
> > > >
> > https://www.redpill-linpro.com/sysadvent/2016/12/09/
> slimming-routing-table.html
> > > ---
> > > As described in a prevous post, we’re testing a HPE Altoline 6920 in
> > > our lab. The Altoline 6920 is, like other switches based on the
> > > Broadcom Trident II chipset, able to handle up to 720 Gbps of
> > > throughput, packing 48x10GbE + 6x40GbE ports in a compact 1RU chassis.
> > > Its price is in all likelihood a single-digit percentage of the price
> > > of a traditional Internet router with a comparable throughput rating.
> > > ---
> > >
> > > This makes it sound like small-FIB router is single-digit percentage
> > > cost of full-FIB.
> >
> > Do you know of any traditional «Internet scale» router that can do ~720
> > Gbps of throughput for less than 10x the price of a Trident II box? Or
> > even <100kUSD? (Disregarding any volume discounts.)
> >
> > > Also having Trident in Internet facing interface may be suspect,
> > > especially if you need to go from fast interface to slow or busy
> > > interface, due to very minor packet buffers. This obviously won't be
> > > much of a problem in inside-DC traffic.
> >
> > Quite the opposite, changing between different interface speeds happens
> > very commonly inside the data centre (and most of the time it's done by
> > shallow-buffered switches using Trident II or similar chips).
> >
> > One ubiquitous configuration has the servers and any external uplinks
> > attached with 10GE to leaf switches which in turn connects to a 40GE
> > spine layer with. In this config server<->server and server<->Internet
> > packets will need to change speed twice:
> >
> > [server]-10GE-(leafX)-40GE-(spine)-40GE-(leafY)-10GE-[server/internet]
> >
> > I suppose you could for example use a couple of MX240s or something as
> > a special-purpose leaf layer for external connectivity.
> > MPC5E-40G10G-IRB or something towards the 40GE spines and any regular
> > 10GE MPC towards the exits. That way you'd only have one
> > shallow-buffered speed conversion remaining. But I'm very sceptical if
> > something like this makes sense after taking the cost/benefit ratio
> > into account.
> >
> > Tore