Spine TCAM utilization climbs as CRB host routes and IRB state concentrate centrally. What scale tradeoff does that illustrate versus ERB?
Select an answer to reveal the explanation.
Short Explanation
CRB piles the routing homework on the spines, so their TCAM can fill up with host and IRB state. ERB spreads that homework across the leaves instead. That is the scale tradeoff — not a reason to scrap VXLAN or park MACs in the IGP.
Full Explanation
Centralized IRB in CRB increases host-route and related L3 state on spines/border nodes, which can exhaust TCAM/FIB resources as the fabric grows. ERB pushes much of that edge routing state to leaves, relieving central devices at the cost of leaf scale and consistency. Underlay IGPs do not replace EVPN MAC learning, and QinQ is not the prescribed remedy.