Bird vs Quagga revisited
arnold at nipper.de
Wed Aug 22 19:43:19 UTC 2012
On 22.08.2012 11:22, John Souter wrote:
> On 22/08/12 06:19, Hank Nussbacher wrote:
>> ...Any feedback appreciated.
> I can't speak too highly of BIRD. Our use case is probably not
> completely typical, but our multilateral peering route servers have been
> hugely improved by switching to BIRD. Our two primary route servers,
> one for each LINX London LAN, use BIRD; the two secondaries use an
> enhanced version of Quagga.
> The BIRD route server scales better, gives much higher performance, is
> much more robust, and is much easier to restart - especially when there
> are lots of connected sessions. The development team are fantastic:
> very active and responsive, and especially responsive to the needs of
> the IXP community.
> Switching hats to Euro-IX, BIRD is now the most used route server
> amongst IXPs, as can be seen from our latest annual report:
+1 ... I guess we at DE-CIX perhaps run the largest routeserver setups
with full as-path and prefix-list filtering. BIRD really was some
magnitudes of perfomance improvement compared to Quagga.
In the meantime some of us (LINX, INEX, DE-CIX) also supported
development of Quagga as a routeserver. Biggest issue currently is to
get this code into mainline Quagga to make it suitabke for further
development and improvement.
Personally I would like to see more work on all three opensource
implementations, i.e. BIRD, OpenBGPd and Quagga.
Arnold Nipper CTO/COO e-mail: arnold.nipper at de-cix.net
DE-CIX Management GmbH mobile: +49 152 5371 7690
Lichtstr. 43i, 50825 Koeln phone: +49 69 1730 902 22
Geschaeftsfuehrer Harald A. Summa fax: +49 69 4056 2716
Registergericht AG Koeln HRB 51135 http://www.de-cix.net
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Size: 260 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
More information about the NANOG