AW: /27 the new /24

Fri Oct 2 16:05:51 UTC 2015

Welcome to the real world ...

Cisco SUP720-3BXL
Cisco RSP720-3BXL

and even the new and shiny SUP2T only supports 1 Mio routes (dicvided to IPv4 MPLS, IPv4 VRF, IPv4 global routes, etc).

I guess this is still the truth: there are at least a few ten thousand of these devices running big parts of the internet. Take a look at some big players network - e.g. Level3. Their customer access routers in Slovakia, Austria and Germany are still based on the Cisco 6500/7600 platform.

Of course there are many other vendors and platforms available which do NOT have this limitations. But there are also at least a ton of vendors on the market with exactly the same limitation :(.

best regards

Jürgen Jaritsch
Head of Network & Infrastructure

ANEXIA Internetdienstleistungs GmbH

Telefon: +43-5-0556-300
Telefax: +43-5-0556-500

E-Mail: JJaritsch at anexia-it.com 
Web: http://www.anexia-it.com 

Anschrift Hauptsitz Klagenfurt: Feldkirchnerstraße 140, 9020 Klagenfurt
Geschäftsführer: Alexander Windbichler
Firmenbuch: FN 289918a | Gerichtsstand: Klagenfurt | UID-Nummer: AT U63216601

-----Ursprüngliche Nachricht-----
Von: NANOG [mailto:nanog-bounces at nanog.org] Im Auftrag von Mike Hammett
Gesendet: Freitag, 02. Oktober 2015 17:51
Cc: NANOG
Betreff: Re: /27 the new /24

How many routers out there have this limitation? A $100 router I bought ten years ago could manage many full tables. If someone's network can't match that today, should I really have any pity for them? 

----- 
Mike Hammett 
Intelligent Computing Solutions 
http://www.ics-il.com 

Midwest Internet Exchange 
http://www.midwest-ix.com 

----- Original Message -----

From: "Matthew Kaufman" <matthew at matthew.at> 
To: "Mike Hammett" <nanog at ics-il.net> 
Cc: "NANOG" <nanog at nanog.org> 
Sent: Friday, October 2, 2015 10:48:29 AM 
Subject: Re: /27 the new /24 

Cheaper than buying everyone TCAM 

Matthew Kaufman 

(Sent from my iPhone) 

> On Oct 2, 2015, at 8:32 AM, Mike Hammett <nanog at ics-il.net> wrote: 
> 
> Much m ore than I'm willing to spend. ;-) 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ----- 
> Mike Hammett 
> Intelligent Computing Solutions 
> http://www.ics-il.com 
> 
> 
> 
> Midwest Internet Exchange 
> http://www.midwest-ix.com 
> 
> 
> ----- Original Message ----- 
> 
> From: "Matthew Kaufman" <matthew at matthew.at> 
> To: "Justin Wilson - MTIN" <lists at mtin.net> 
> Cc: "NANOG" <nanog at nanog.org> 
> Sent: Friday, October 2, 2015 9:48:33 AM 
> Subject: Re: /27 the new /24 
> 
> A /24 isn't that expensive yet... 
> 
> Matthew Kaufman 
> 
> (Sent from my iPhone) 
> 
>> On Oct 2, 2015, at 7:32 AM, Justin Wilson - MTIN <lists at mtin.net> wrote: 
>> 
>> I was in a discussion the other day and several Tier2 providers were talking about the idea of adjusting their BGP filters to accept prefixes smaller than a /24. A few were saying they thought about going down to as small as a /27. This was mainly due to more networks coming online and not having even a /24 of IPv4 space. The first argument is against this is the potential bloat the global routing table could have. Many folks have worked hard for years to summarize and such. others were saying they would do a /26 or bigger. 
>> 
>> However, what do we do about the new networks which want to do BGP but only can get small allocations from someone (either a RIR or one of their upstreams)? 
>> 
>> Just throwing that out there. Seems like an interesting discussion. 
>> 
>> 
>> Justin Wilson 
>> j2sw at mtin.net 
>> 
>> --- 
>> http://www.mtin.net Owner/CEO 
>> xISP Solutions- Consulting – Data Centers - Bandwidth 
>> 
>> http://www.midwest-ix.com COO/Chairman 
>> Internet Exchange - Peering - Distributed Fabric 
> 