IPv4 BGP Table Reduction Analysis - Prefixes Filter by RIRs Minimum Allocations Boundaries
Eduardo Ascenco Reis
eduardo at intron.com.br
Tue Dec 4 20:01:39 UTC 2007
Andy and fellows,
Sun, 2 Dec 2007 09:59:19 -0500, Andy Davidson <andy at nosignal.org> escreveu:
> Do you still have the lab setup ? Could you work out what happens to
> the routing table and traffic routing if you permit one deaggregation
> per rir prefix ? I.e. This /19 is permitted to become two /20s, but
> it is not permitted to become four /21. My desire would be to see
> the resolved routing table look almost as trim as your 40% saving,
> but a significant amount of traffic routed as intended by the
> originating network.
I am travelling now (IETF meeting), but I think that when I come back the lab can easily be setup again reloading the same BGP data or from a different date.
You proposed basically a filter change in the setup. The only job for that is to edit the prefix list and run again the analyses. May be we can discuss more about that before running the test.
> Lastly, perhaps another comment for your recommendations and
> conclusions section could be that traffic is hurt most in this model
> for networks who deaggregate most. Lets encourage people who read
> this document to infer that aggregating their prefixes would improve
> their reach in the post 250k routing table world.
I agree with you.
Thanks for your feedback.
Eduardo Ascenço Reis
<eduardo at intron.com.br>
More information about the NANOG