nanog mailing list archives
Re: 200K prefixes - Weekly Routing Table Report
From: Adrian Chadd <adrian () creative net au>
Date: Sat, 14 Oct 2006 10:08:27 +0800
On Sat, Oct 14, 2006, Fergie wrote:
I'll bet you nickels to doughnuts that it won't make much of a difference -- in the fact that too may end-ASs originate specifics to attempt to "engineer" their traffic....
You could always send those networks a bill for your next BGP-speaking core upgrade. TCAM entries are expensive y'know.
From what I've seen here and other lists there seems to be a good
financial reason now to aggregate thanks to implementation choices by vendors and purchasing choices by providers. Adrian (239k is enough for everyone, or something.)
Current thread:
- Re: 200K prefixes - Weekly Routing Table Report Fergie (Oct 13)
- <Possible follow-ups>
- RE: 200K prefixes - Weekly Routing Table Report Alex Rubenstein (Oct 13)
- RE: 200K prefixes - Weekly Routing Table Report Fergie (Oct 13)
- Re: 200K prefixes - Weekly Routing Table Report Adrian Chadd (Oct 13)
- RE: 200K prefixes - Weekly Routing Table Report Greg Boehnlein (Oct 13)