Perhaps Cisco is just trying to force us to buy more memory:
ID: 79764
Feature-set: bgp
Title: Memory Leak in BGP Router process
Reported: 11.1(7) 11.2(2)
State: J
There appears to be a Memory Leak in BGP Router Process.
Notice the State. It is J - which stands for Junked - which means they
will not fix this since it isn't viewed as an important problem.
Hank
I hope the smiley face was omitted accidentally!
The bug report was junked (by the way, we don't junk legitimate
bug reports) because the router in question was a 7200 with 32M
of memory taking full routing from several peers. It simply
didn't have enough memory. There was no evidence of a memory leak.
Needless to say, if there had been a leak, it would have
had high priority.
The gent who opened the bug report in the first place was
"unfamiliar" with the environment. 
Robert.
Hank Nussbacher wrote:
In the future to avoid misunderstandings, suggest that closed or junked
problems contain a fuller explanation as you stated below.
I hope the smiley face was omitted accidentally!
The bug report was junked (by the way, we don't junk legitimate
bug reports) because the router in question was a 7200 with 32M
of memory taking full routing from several peers. It simply
didn't haveenough memory. There was no evidence of a memory leak.
Needless to say, if there had been a leak, it would have
had high priority.The gent who opened the bug report in the first place was
"unfamiliar" with the environment.Robert.
HankNussbacher wrote:
>
> Perhaps Cisco is just trying to force us to buy more memory:
>
> ID: 79764
> Feature-set: bgp
> Title: Memory Leak in BGP Router process
> Reported: 11.1(7) 11.2(2)
> State: J
>
> There appears to be a Memory Leak in BGP Router Process.
>
> Notice the State. It is J - which stands for Junked - which means they
> will not fix this since it isn't viewed as an important problem.
>
> Hank
Hank Nussbacher
Agreed, the release notes should have been updated with the
reason the bug was being junked.
Robert.
Hank Nussbacher wrote:
In cisco.external.nanog you write:
Agreed, the release notes should have been updated with the
reason the bug was being junked.
Better for the junked bugs to not show up.. I am contacting folks to fix it..
--ravi