Re: [Idr] why has 4096 bytes limit on BGP messages size?

Curtis Villamizar <curtis@occnc.com> Fri, 15 June 2007 05:20 UTC

Return-path: <idr-bounces@ietf.org>
Received: from [127.0.0.1] (helo=stiedprmman1.va.neustar.com) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1Hz4Ed-0007Wt-Ij; Fri, 15 Jun 2007 01:20:35 -0400
Received: from [10.91.34.44] (helo=ietf-mx.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1Hz4Eb-0007WC-4H for idr@ietf.org; Fri, 15 Jun 2007 01:20:33 -0400
Received: from c-24-7-120-3.hsd1.ca.comcast.net ([24.7.120.3] helo=sailbum.orleans.occnc.com) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1Hz4EZ-000627-MY for idr@ietf.org; Fri, 15 Jun 2007 01:20:33 -0400
Received: from sailbum.orleans.occnc.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by sailbum.orleans.occnc.com (8.13.6/8.13.6) with ESMTP id l5F5LAM9001940; Fri, 15 Jun 2007 01:21:10 -0400 (EDT) (envelope-from curtis@sailbum.orleans.occnc.com)
Message-Id: <200706150521.l5F5LAM9001940@sailbum.orleans.occnc.com>
To: Vishwas Manral <vishwas.ietf@gmail.com>
From: Curtis Villamizar <curtis@occnc.com>
Subject: Re: [Idr] why has 4096 bytes limit on BGP messages size?
In-reply-to: Your message of "Thu, 14 Jun 2007 11:27:53 PDT." <77ead0ec0706141127i61017d2av74151c7dd4004044@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 15 Jun 2007 01:20:50 -0400
X-Spam-Score: 1.8 (+)
X-Scan-Signature: d6b246023072368de71562c0ab503126
Cc: idr <idr@ietf.org>
X-BeenThere: idr@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5
Precedence: list
Reply-To: curtis@occnc.com
List-Id: Inter-Domain Routing <idr.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/idr>, <mailto:idr-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www1.ietf.org/pipermail/idr>
List-Post: <mailto:idr@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:idr-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/idr>, <mailto:idr-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
Errors-To: idr-bounces@ietf.org

In message <77ead0ec0706141127i61017d2av74151c7dd4004044@mail.gmail.com>
"Vishwas Manral" writes:
>  
> Its again a memory management issue of an implementation right. We
> could allocate a central pool and extract memory from there.
>  
> Thanks,
> Vishwas


Yes and no.  Dynamic allocation is a wonderful thing but you have to
allocate memory and post a read on every BGP session simultaneously.
There is no way to know which one will have updates to send next.  You
should post a big enough read that TCP and your BGP implementation can
operate efficiently if you instantaneously go from quiescent to a
torrent of BGP updates.

Curtis

_______________________________________________
Idr mailing list
Idr@ietf.org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/idr