XPost: comp.dcom.lans.ethernet, comp.dcom.sys.cisco   
   From: mark_cruzNOTFORSPAM@hotmail.com   
      
   "Barry Margolin"  wrote in message   
   news:barmar-2FD372.14174320092012@news.eternal-september.org...   
   > Usually they each maintain separate tables.  Each routing protocol   
   > typically needs to maintain its own state, because they operate   
   > independently -- a RIP route shouldn't normally be advertised via BGP.   
   > The hardware FIB is created by merging all the information from the   
   > different protocols.   
      
   Thanks for the reply. To be more specific -- a routing protocol maintains   
   its state and RIB table should reflect the RIB information down to the   
   kernel or/and hardware; so my question is -- should it be done on both   
   kernel and hardware, i.e. FIB in the hardware, or only FIB in hardware?  (By   
   the hardware let's consider L3 switch, or network processor). Obviously if   
   we have a generic x86 machine with NICs and OS Linux, then the only FIB we   
   update is the kernel's FIB, but what if we have Linux and user-level   
   applications implementing routing protocols, and underlying network   
   processor capable of maintaining its own FIB tables?   
      
   > Also, the memory for the hardware FIB is usually limited, so you just   
   > want the minimal forwarding information.  But routing protocols need to   
   > maintain state, sometimes quite a bit of it (e.g. the AS path in BGP).   
   >   
      
   Mark   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)