minimum requirements for a full bgp feed

Christopher Woodfield rekoil at
Tue Jan 4 16:54:56 UTC 2005

256M should be considered a minimum. As far back as a year ago it was 
dicey to run BGP with could load the table, but a BGP flap 
would cause MALLOCFAILs aplenty. If there's a router out there that can 
hold today's table in 128M, it won't stay that way for long.

How may BGP peers are you planning on homing on this box? If you're 
looking at more than a handful, I'd even say that 256M may not be 
enough for long...


On Jan 3, 2005, at 9:27 AM, Erik Amundson wrote:

> Well,
> In my experience it depends on the model of router.  I had a 3640 
> (granted, it's old) with 128MB that was just fine until a couple of 
> months ago, now it's not enough.  For one BGP table you will have to 
> have at least 256MB in a 36xx router.  Our 720xVXR routers currently 
> have 256MB in them as well, but we've already ordered upgrades to 1GB 
> with new NPE-G1s...
> - Erik
> From: Mark Bojara [mailto:mark at]
>  Sent: Monday, January 03, 2005 8:23 AM
> To: nanog at
> Subject: minimum requirements for a full bgp feed
> Hello All,
> If I wish to purchase a Cisco router that handles a full internet BGP 
> feed what are the minimum specs I should be looking at?
> Regards
> Mark Bojara
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: text/enriched
Size: 2050 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <>

More information about the NANOG mailing list