Partial vs Full tables

Baldur Norddahl baldur.norddahl at
Mon Jun 8 08:06:02 UTC 2020

On 08.06.2020 08.04, Saku Ytti wrote:
> On Mon, 8 Jun 2020 at 00:55, Ryan Woolley <rwoolleynanog at> wrote:
>> order of 2x) on even very-well-connected routers.  This is implemented
>> by Arista in the feature that Yang linked to with the URL containing
>> "fib-compression", but the actual command is better named: "ip fib
>> compression redundant-specifics filter"
> I'll take my imagination boat from the dry docks and sail to 2035. Lot
> of people still run Jericho ANET, it is the new CAT6500 PFC3. DFZ
> won't fit it anymore without redundant-specifics.
> Are we at all concerned that someone in the DFZ advertises a minimum
> set of prefixes needed to force decompression and if we are, how do we
> protect from it, if we are not, why are we not?

I imagine that is not so easily done. I can only get away with 
announcing prefixes that I own, which for most people will limit the 
amount of damage you could do. For someone who has unfiltered access to 
announce any prefix, he can already today announce 16 million x /24 and 
crash just about any router out there.



More information about the NANOG mailing list