nanog mailing list archives
Re: Force10 Gear - Opinions
From: Jo Rhett <jrhett () netconsonance com>
Date: Wed, 3 Sep 2008 17:36:45 -0700
On Sep 3, 2008, at 5:30 PM, James Jun wrote:
uRPF was problematic back in PFC2 based platforms (i.e. SUP2) where it isfurther dependent upon unicast routes in FIB TCAM.
uRPF was untenable on SUP2, not problematic. It wasn't possible above ... 3mb/sec?
Guys, this isn't SOHO routing here. If you can't take a single gig interface at full burst with your feature, you don't have it.
uRPF currently works fine enough on PFC3 based sups, the only problem however is currently only "one or the other" mode is supported for the entire box, as opposed to per interface. For example, configuringloose-mode uRPF in one interface, then configuring a strict-mode in another will result in entire box behaving as strict-mode interface for all uRPF enabled interfaces. Other than this caveat, I never had problems with it.
That's one hell of a caveot, given that you always want strict on your customers and loose on your transit links.
However, these uRPF issues are fully documented. Reading manuals anddocumentation should help you avoid getting into operational problems suchas "kept falling back and killing the units" scenario.
This statement is patently false. The uRPF failures I dealt with were based entirely on the recommended settings, and were confirmed by Cisco. Last I heard (2 months ago) the problems remain. Cisco just isn't being honest with you about them.
Control plane policing via cp-policer works quite well on pfc3 based 6500's.This is ofcourse a very important feature (more important than uRPF intoday's internet IMO) that appears to be missing in f10 gear which is whatPaul was saying earlier.
Based on what? Other than some idea of "um, we can't meet BCP38 so lets call it unimportant?"
-- Jo RhettNet Consonance : consonant endings by net philanthropy, open source and other randomness
Current thread:
- Re: Force10 Gear - Opinions jim deleskie (Sep 01)
- Re: Force10 Gear - Opinions Owen DeLong (Sep 01)
- <Possible follow-ups>
- Re: Force10 Gear - Opinions Jo Rhett (Sep 03)
- RE: Force10 Gear - Opinions James Jun (Sep 03)
- Re: Force10 Gear - Opinions Jo Rhett (Sep 03)
- Re: Force10 Gear - Opinions Rubens Kuhl Jr. (Sep 03)
- Cisco uRPF failures Jo Rhett (Sep 04)
- Re: Cisco uRPF failures Anton Kapela (Sep 06)
- Re: Cisco uRPF failures Christopher Morrow (Sep 06)
- Re: Cisco uRPF failures Jo Rhett (Sep 11)
- Re: Cisco uRPF failures Sam Stickland (Sep 07)
- Re: Cisco uRPF failures Saku Ytti (Sep 08)
- Re: Cisco uRPF failures Jo Rhett (Sep 11)
- Re: Cisco uRPF failures Saku Ytti (Sep 11)
- Re: Cisco uRPF failures Jo Rhett (Sep 11)
- RE: Force10 Gear - Opinions James Jun (Sep 03)