200K prefixes - Weekly Routing Table Report

Jerry Pasker info at n-connect.net
Fri Oct 13 19:35:36 UTC 2006

>On Oct 13, 2006, at 2:02 PM, Routing Analysis Role Account wrote:
>>Routing Table Report   04:00 +10GMT Sat 14 Oct, 2006
>>Analysis Summary
>>BGP routing table entries examined:                              
>>     Prefixes after maximum aggregation:                          
>Shall we all have a moment of silence for 200K prefixes in the global table.
>Maybe reboot all our routers at once or something?

Thanks for reminding me to change my neighbor 
maximum-prefix 250000 80 statements to something 
more "reasonable" before I started getting 
warnings to my pager!  I'm still a few thousand 
routes shy of 200K as of today......

I like that second line that you included. 
Maximum aggregation isn't always possible, but I 
think there are a lot of operators out there that 
don't aggregate as much as they could.  They cite 
various reasons for chewing up router memory ( 
"Oh, it's technically impossible....". or my 
favorite.... "because someone could announce more 
specifics and steal our traffic, so we have to 
announce 842 /24s all separately, ALL THE TIME" ) 
while the rest of the net doesn't seem to have 
those issues, (or they deal with them as they 
happen... "uh, oh, someone's blackholing our 
traffic, let's announce our space as /24s until 
we can get that other operator to correct their 
stupidity... we'll withdraw the /24s as soon as 
it's fixed 22 hours later....")

You should have put a difference number there 
too, just so everyone didn't have to get out 
their calculators to figure out how many extra 
routes there are (91525).  So since my calculator 
is out, I did some more numbers. Of those 91,525 
routes that are extra routes in the table, 
14,444 of those are the dirty-30.

So of those top 30 ASes that I refer to as the 
"Dirty Thirty", represent .13% (POINT ONE THREE 
PERCENT!) of the ASes, but they contribute 15.7% 
of the amount of route-bloat on the net!! 

The dirty-thirty is a shameful list.  But 
apparently there isn't enough pressure from 
within the routing community to not be on it.  At 
least not yet.  ;-)

"I'll reboot mine, if you reboot yours."

More information about the NANOG mailing list