|
North American Network Operators Group Date Prev | Date Next | Date Index | Thread Index | Author Index | Historical Re: aggregation in 207/8
> Is it just me, or does the level of aggregation within 207/8 really suck? > > -- > Eric Kozowski Structured Network Systems, Inc. > [email protected] Better, Cheaper, Faster -- pick any two. > (503)656-3235 FAX "Providing High Quality, Reliable Internet Service" > (800)881-0962 Voice 56k to DS1 We see 616 routes in 207/8. Our route aggregation suggestion tool suggests 281 aggregation possibilities (which is not 281 routes potentially saved, but 281 routes that could be aggregated). It's clear from hand-inspection that some of the routes are being announced more specifically for multi-homed customers, but I'm sure that a lot of those routes could be aggregated or are covered by an already-announced more general route. Right now, it sorts routes and aggregation suggestions by provider and not by IP address, but you can look at: http://routes.netaxs.com Some technical & political sisclaimers are on that page :) One key disclaimer is that it is now sorting by next-hop at MAE-East instead of by AS-PATH, but we see a 1:1 correlation in our data between next-AS and next-hop. The other key one is that it's a tool that produces interesting output now, but is NOT designed/tested for generating configs from. 207.6/16 207.10/16 207.12/14 207.16/16 207.23/16 207.43/16 207.70.64/18 Appear to be some of the most-in-need-of-aggregation areas. One interesting thing that appears to be the case is that some owners (nic-wise) of <= /16s appear to not have a matching catch-all route and corresponding aggregation installed/announced. Avi - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
|