Hi Nanog,
We want to Deploy and use FRR for Route reflection on a Dell Edge. Any one has expereience with it and can give insight into number of routes and scale that you used FRR to do Route Reflection
There is possibly no better place to ask than on the FRR mailing list:
frog@lists.frrouting.org
Cheers,
James.
Hello Rakesh,
As James said, better to ask it at FRR mailing list.
Generally chipset is what limits the scale (e.g. trident2 is 128k ipv4 lpm https://docs.cumulusnetworks.com/cumulus-linux/Layer-3/Routing/ ). If you disable "zebra" daemon, FRR works only in control-plane then you would most likely have a limitation with memory/RAM only. (speed is another issue).
Regards
Erçin TORUN
ERCIN TORUN
Sent: Friday, November 15, 2019 9:34 AMHello Rakesh,
As James said, better to ask it at FRR mailing list.
Generally chipset is what limits the scale (e.g. trident2 is 128k ipv4 lpm
Routing | Cumulus Linux 5.7 ). If
you disable "zebra" daemon, FRR works only in control-plane then you would
most likely have a limitation with memory/RAM only. (speed is another
issue).
Data-plane lookup memory limitations have nothing to do with the scale of a RR function, as you eluded to (if the RR is in path then it has to act as any other routing node so FIB scaling limitations apply -but that is completely orthogonal to the RR function).
One would assume that NOS to be used for a crucial role in the overall BGP infrastructure would feature the essential ability to limit the installation (complete/selective) of routes to FIB/data-plane. (or in the modern virtual deployments lack the data-plane altogether).
adam
Hi Adam,
The intention is not to put in the Data Plane at all but use it for control functions and calculating optimal paths, we are happy with how FRR is handling small network islands to Route traffic in Data Plane and wanted to test this as a candidate for Hierarchical Route-Reflection at site level while proven hardware will be used at a Cluster level.
for the benefit of others, FRR member replied about his observations
‘’’
Hi Rakesh,
We currently running one FRR route-reflector on a backbone, some peers send FV, some not. Here is header of ‘show bgp summary’:
IPv4 Unicast Summary:
BGP router identifier 10.10.10.100, local AS number 65009 vrf-id 0
BGP table version 143698323
RIB entries 1428204, using 218 MiB of memory
Peers 26, using 537 KiB of memory
Peer groups 9, using 576 bytes of memory
We hit problem with bgpd eating whole CPU core on 7.1, so I built FRR with appropriate patch manually. But that must been fixed in 7.2. Otherwise it runs pretty good for the last ~3 months.
‘’’
To avoid disabling Zebra daemon, you can use "table-map" to choose the
routes to send to Zebra:
<http://docs.frrouting.org/en/latest/bgp.html#clicmd-table-mapROUTE-MAP-NAME>
For example:
route-map DENY_ALL deny 10
router bgp 65000 vrf private
address-family ipv4 unicast
table-map DENY_ALL
exit-address-family