Full BGP table in a VRF, good or bad idea?

[DuncanM2008]

Hello,

I'm currently mulling over the concept of running a full BGP table (340000 prefixes more or less) inside a VRF or whether I should stick with the normal and just use the Default IP Routing Table and VRF everything else....

Can't make my mind up, looking for some seasoned advice.

Hardware is Dual SUP720-3BXL (C6509-E) with DFC line cards.

Any thoughts?

Cheers,

Dunc.

[vmiller]

What would you expect to gain by doing this ?

[fb_webuser]

We featured your question on our page. Check out the responses here http://www.facebook.com/CiscoSupportCommunity/posts/429068390443176

---

Posted by WebUser Cisco NetPro from Cisco Support Community App

[vmiller]

Blocked by policy.

[DuncanM2008]

I suppose ultimately I'm just going for constistency, I have a 3750 stack doing customer routing (in a DC) and I'm going to add several external / public routes to these devices so to avoid the DC VLAN's communicating with them I'll use a VRF to seperate (VRF-Lite).

So when I interconnect the 6500 to the 3750 i was aiming for constistency in Public / External routes being in a VRF with the same name and DC VLAN routes being in either the default table or another VRF.

Or I could just migrate the DC VLAN's to a seperate non-default VRF across all devices, a bit more config but ultimarely do-able.

Interesting.

Dunc,