|
North American Network Operators Group Date Prev | Date Next | Date Index | Thread Index | Author Index | Historical RE: exponential route prefix growth, was: Re: The Cidr Report
I'm tossing in my hat as a company who has recently multi-homed our enterprise network. We would have preferred to receive a continous block, /23 from ARIN. Unfortunatly they do not allocate smaller then a /20. We went to our provider and tried to justify a /23. They rejected our claim, even though our predicte growth puts us around 200 used IPs in a year. We ended up getting only one /24. Then another upstream provider, quite large, forced another /24 upon us. When we stated we didn't need/want it, they said they could take it back but it was not standard practice; all DS3 customers get a /24. Anyway... Think of all the other companies out there who get treated like this? Have you ever checked this URL out: http://www.employees.org/~tbates/checkas.html, select "Print Full Aggregation by AS Report." If you run this, almost 10,000 routes could be aggregated. This is a 11% savings! I've ran across content providers who have a /18, but announce them all as /24. That's 63 to many routes in my table. Minimum Savings: - UUNet CA (816): 137 - AT&T (7018): 67 - UUNet (701): 66 - Sprint CA (3602): 56 - Qwest (209): 44 - Genuity (1): 40 - Level 3 (3356): 17 Has there ever been consideration to create a group/organization to monitor these tables? Someone who can call these providers and enforce aggregation? Just a thought? Perhaps ICANN, ARIN, or someone could establish a team deticated to making sure the little guys don't get kicked out of the multi-homed world. > -----Original Message----- > From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]]On Behalf Of > William Waites > Sent: Friday, September 22, 2000 4:48 PM > To: [email protected] > Cc: [email protected] > Subject: Re: exponential route prefix growth, was: Re: The Cidr Report > > > > Kai Schlichting <[email protected]> wrote: > > > What 'threshold' has triggered this sudden event, with routes going > > from 60,000 to 90,000 in just 12 months? Multihoming becoming > > fashionable? Dinky-rink providers getting multihomed, and for lack > > Fashionable or not, multihoming is a usefull and sound practice. The > problem is that regulatory organizations (ex. ARIN) make it very > difficult to do it properly, and so cause inefficient use of address > space and routing table bloat. > > -w > >
|