Re: Weekly Routing Table Report

[Jared Mauch <jared () puck nether net>]

On Fri, Jan 07, 2005 at 03:02:40PM -0500, Joe Maimon wrote:
> > This is an automated weekly mailing describing the state of the Internet
> > Routing Table as seen from APNIC's router in Japan.
> > Daily listings are sent to bgp-stats () lists apnic net
> >
> > If you have any comments please contact Philip Smith <pfs () cisco com>.
> >
> > Routing Table Report   04:00 +10GMT Sat 08 Jan, 2005
> >
> > Analysis Summary
> > ----------------
> >
> > BGP routing table entries examined:                              153319
> >   Prefixes after maximum aggregation:                           89967
>
> Should it matter that in six months its gone from 140k to 153k?
> At this rate it might crack 200k in less than two years.

        I think that's a matter that seems to be already decided.  People
want multihoming, redudnancy and such and are willing to put the burden
on the global routing table as a result.

        The result, people are upgrading router memory to the max, lots
of people have been asking recently about how much memory for a full
routing table, etc..

        I think the simple answer is:

        If you're using anything "recent" (ie: since 2001) you're going
to want to use 256m at minimum and ideally 512m-1g of dram in your system
with a reasonable cpu to process updates quickly.

        This is something that the market has really demanded (multihoming)
so the result is a global impact.  The statement "think globally, act
locally" comes to mind, but it's a tough problem as everyone depends on
their internet connectivity these days, so they want it to be
as reliable as possible.

        - jared

-- 
Jared Mauch  | pgp key available via finger from jared () puck nether net
clue++;      | http://puck.nether.net/~jared/  My statements are only mine.