Date: Fri, 21 Sep 2007 18:34:58 +0200 From: Claudio Jeker <cjeker@diehard.n-r-g.com> To: freebsd-net@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Quagga as border router Message-ID: <20070921163458.GC24267@diehard.n-r-g.com> In-Reply-To: <46F3E8A5.6010304@FreeBSD.org> References: <46F1AC0B.9040109@ibctech.ca> <46F1BDE1.8090102@gmail.com> <46F1F136.3010203@ibctech.ca> <46F23D74.9000701@gmail.com> <46F3B7C9.7050605@ibctech.ca> <46F3E8A5.6010304@FreeBSD.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Fri, Sep 21, 2007 at 04:52:05PM +0100, Bruce M. Simpson wrote: > Folks have been asking about XORP in this thread. > > XORP can take a full BGP feed just fine as long as you have enough > memory.; for a full default-free-zone feed, you are looking at in the > region of 1GB - 1.5GB, perhaps less if you use aggregation. > Wow. That's a serious amount of memory for a single full feed. I have a OpenBGPD test box with currently 7 full feeds plus a bit of additional chicken shit consuming less than 160MB for all three bgpd daemons. Btw. the box is a 600MHz Via C3 with 512MB of RAM acting as route-viewer. > If you look at the NSDI '05 paper you'll see that it has a number of > benefits over existing designs, BGP route propagation in particular > should be faster: > http://www.usenix.org/events/nsdi05/tech/handley.html > Like XORP OpenBGPD is "event" driven and does not use timeout based route scanners for updates. That's probably why most people like the speed of OpenBGPD :) > The architecture is deliberately structured so that forwarding > functionality may be implemented in hardware. I believe XORP may work > with the NetFPGA but don't have firm information about this. > > IPv6 support is strong as XORP was designed to route IPv6 from the start > as a whole suite - multicast support is also strong. > Yes, multicast support is one of the strength of xorp. -- :wq Claudio
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20070921163458.GC24267>