From: Matt Wagner (miguknom@xxxxxxxxxxx)
Date: Fri Aug 10 2001 - 03:02:53 GMT-3
Obviously you have to have enough horsepower to run OSPF for a network of
given size. But I'm pretty sure that if you had a bunch of high-end routers
decked out enough to run BGP, they still couldn't handle 100,000 OSPF routes
because the protocol wasn't made to handle a large, flat network of that
scale. I am think that I read something to that effect in the Internet
Routing Architecture book a while back, and I've heard it before, but I
can't back it up with official documentation. I won't mind being wrong on
this, either, since I'd rather see OSPF be more capable than less capable.
In any case, the design of a network can have almost as much impact on the
device trying to run the D algoryth as its resources. That is why a
well-designed topology can have more routers in a given area that a loopy,
discontiguous one. If you don't believe that, set up a test bed with a few
hundred routers and let me know how it turns out.
Matt
A man said to the Universe, "Sir, I exist".
The Universe replied, "The fact may be,
but it inspires in me no sense of obligation."
----Original Message Follows----
From: jonatale@earthlink.net
To: Matt Wagner <miguknom@hotmail.com>
Subject: Re: OSPF Limits
Date: Fri, 10 Aug 2001 00:02:10 -0700
it is definitely a hoarse power issue (mem, BW, proc speed), the algorithm
has
no limits -- what would they be?? if you write good code (linked lists etc.)
it
can scale forever...
Matt Wagner wrote:
> Hey (group), let me know if I'm wrong about this, but the "50" rule is a
> generic rule. Whether you can support more or less than that depends on
a
> few things, like whether you are set up entirely hierarchically or
whether
> you are looping all over the place, the number of ASBRs, etc. I also am
> pretty sure that it has less to do with the horsepower of the routers you
> are using and more to do with the protocol itself handling a database
with a
> certain degree of complexity well, which is the main reason you shouldn't
> redistribute BGP into OSSPF.
>
> With proper design, you can probably handle more that 50 routers, and
with
> poor design, probably fewer. That's just what I have always thought,
> though. Any comments would be appreciated.
>
> Matt
>
> A man said to the Universe, "Sir, I exist".
> The Universe replied, "The fact may be,
> but it inspires in me no sense of obligation."
>
> ----Original Message Follows----
> From: "Dietmar Gaar" <strongbow71@gmx.at>
> Reply-To: "Dietmar Gaar" <strongbow71@gmx.at>
> To: <ccielab@groupstudy.com>
> Subject: OSPF Limits
> Date: Thu, 9 Aug 2001 11:59:12 +0200
>
> Hi,
>
> I4m playing around with OSPF last Days preparing for the Lab Exam.
>
> So in practice, when you have not a perfect but a good Design - how "big"
> can an OSPF Interwork grow up ? Exist there some practical based Limits ?
>
> I already know that there a many unknown Parameters to take a care of -
but
> maybe you can give me some scales...
>
> kind regards,
>
> Dietmar
> **Please read:http://www.groupstudy.com/list/posting.html
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Thu Jun 13 2002 - 10:31:48 GMT-3