nanog mailing list archives
Re: using IRR tools for BGP route filtering
From: Danny McPherson <danny () tcb net>
Date: Fri, 23 Jun 2000 13:50:16 -0600
As has been observed many times on NANOG, one of the advantages that a circuit-switched network like the PSTN has over a packet-switched network like the Internet is that the PSTN has leisurely call setup times and relatively infrequent routing table lookups. No long-distance carrier processes even 100 million phone calls in a day networkwide; yet there are many routers which process billions of packets daily *per interface*.
I suppose for one this depends on your definition of leisurely, though I certainly agree with your point. I believe the lack of pre-populated "forwarding tables" in the PSTN is also a major difference, and a major factor in circuit setup time... The comments regarding number allocation and portability were more so related to the attributes of PSTN datatbase (E800, LIDB, PVN, etc..) versus forwarding capabilities. -danny
Current thread:
- Re: using IRR tools for BGP route filtering, (continued)
- Re: using IRR tools for BGP route filtering Jeff Haas (Jun 23)
- Re: using IRR tools for BGP route filtering Mark Borchers (Jun 23)
- Re: using IRR tools for BGP route filtering Jeff Haas (Jun 23)
- Re: using IRR tools for BGP route filtering Mark Prior (Jun 25)
- Re: using IRR tools for BGP route filtering Dana Hudes (Jun 25)
- Re: using IRR tools for BGP route filtering Joe Provo - Network Architect (Jun 25)
- Re: using IRR tools for BGP route filtering Jeff Haas (Jun 23)
- Re: using IRR tools for BGP route filtering John Fraizer (Jun 23)
- Re: using IRR tools for BGP route filtering Michael Shields (Jun 23)