I think we can do this, it rings a bell. Unfortunately I'm on vacation
until the 26th so I won't be in the office to look this stuff up. Maybe
support can help.
(Actually if I get some time I'll try the web manuals too.)
>If I do run BGP4 with several peers, and I take at least two full routes
>16Mb would cut it pretty close on a PM3 with 16Mb. My IRX114 has two BGP
>sessions taking full routes (48k) and only a static route. This leaves
>approx. 3Mb free memory. The PM3 has a larger overhead (according to your
Hmm, we had 4 full feeds into an IRX when we did testing and it just fit
in 16MB. But I suppose it will vary some.
>Memory is so cheap why bother cutting it close and taking a gamble?
True. 32MB would be safer.
>As I already said, would an IRX with 16Mb handle all of this? My worry is
I think I misread the first time - I was reading the 2 E1s as 2 BGP feeds.
But I think you mean 6 BGP peers using and the 2 lines. No, an IRX wouldn't
handle that - It would run out of RAM with 6 full feeds.
But a PM-3 will handle that with 32MB.
>PM3 with 32Mb would be OK but the basic BGP options could cause problems.
What kind of problems do you mean?
-MZ
-- Lucent Remote Access Division - Chair, Department of Interstitial Affairs Phone: 800-458-9966 510-737-2100 FAX: 510-737-2110 megazone@livingston.com For support requests: support@livingston.com <http://www.livingston.com/> Snail mail: 4464 Willow Road, Pleasanton, CA 94588 - To unsubscribe, email 'majordomo@livingston.com' with 'unsubscribe portmaster-users' in the body of the message.