nanog mailing list archives
Re: BGP Growth projections
From: Mark Radabaugh <mark () amplex net>
Date: Sun, 12 Jul 2009 21:28:54 -0400
Ivan Pepelnjak wrote:
We currently do exactly that - dropping anything longer than a /23 with default routes to cover anything missing. Since were replacing the routers anyway I would prefer to have the capacity to do things correctly rather than what, at least to me, seems a kludge. It is a very workable solution - just not one I am completely comfortable with.Let me be the devil's advocate: why would you need full Internet routing? Taking reasonably sized neighborhoods of your upstreams (AS paths up to X AS numbers) plus a default to your best upstream might do the trick. Ivan
-- Mark Radabaugh Amplex 419.837.5015 x21 mark () amplex net
Current thread:
- Re: BGP Growth projections, (continued)
- Re: BGP Growth projections Jon Lewis (Jul 10)
- Re: BGP Growth projections Joel Jaeggli (Jul 10)
- Re: BGP Growth projections Randy Bush (Jul 11)
- Re: BGP Growth projections Iljitsch van Beijnum (Jul 12)
- Re: BGP Growth projections Adam Rothschild (Jul 10)
- RE: BGP Growth projections Ivan Pepelnjak (Jul 11)
- Re: BGP Growth projections Arie Vayner (Jul 12)
- Re: BGP Growth projections Adam Rothschild (Jul 12)
- RE: BGP Growth projections Ray Burkholder (Jul 12)
- Re: BGP Growth projections Jon Lewis (Jul 12)
- Re: BGP Growth projections Arie Vayner (Jul 12)
- Re: BGP Growth projections Mark Radabaugh (Jul 12)
- Re: BGP Growth projections Justin Shore (Jul 12)
- RE: BGP Growth projections Tomas L. Byrnes (Jul 12)