BGP and memory size

Thu Jan 2 05:58:29 UTC 1997

On Wed, 1 Jan 1997, Robert Craig 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