RE: BGP Growth projections

["Ivan Pepelnjak" <ip () ioshints info>]

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
 
http://www.ioshints.info/about
http://blog.ioshints.info/
 

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Mark Radabaugh [mailto:mark () amplex net] 
> Sent: Friday, July 10, 2009 6:42 PM
> To: nanog list
> Subject: BGP Growth projections
>
> I'm looking for new core routers for a small ISP and having a 
> hard time 
> finding something appropriate and reasonably priced.   We don't have 
> huge traffic levels (<1Gb) and are mostly running Ethernet 
> interfaces to 
> upstreams rather than legacy  interfaces (when did OC3 become 
> legacy?).    
>
> Lot's of choices for routers that can handle the existing BGP 
> tables - but not so much in small platforms (1-10Gb traffic)  
> if you assume that 
> IPv6 is going to explode the routing table in the next 5 
> years.    The 
> manufacturers still seem to think low traffic routers don't 
> need much memory or CPU. 
>
> What projections are you using regarding the default free 
> zone over the next 5 years when picking new hardware?  
>
> -- 
>
> Mark Radabaugh
> Amplex
> 419.837.5015 x21
> mark () amplex net