North American Network Operators Group

Date Prev | Date Next | Date Index | Thread Index | Author Index | Historical

RE: The Cidr Report

  • From: Neil J. McRae
  • Date: Sat Feb 12 06:07:27 2005


> It seems to me they get paid to carry prefixes by their customers.
> And their peers listen to the prefixes because they make 
> money by using those prefixes.

I'm sure this type of statement helps drug dealers to sleep at night! :-)
If the top 100 AS's de-aggregated and increased the routes they
announce by 6000 each would we be so content?

> However, if you are the one filtering and all your 
> competitors figure out how to handle 154,000 routes then you 
> will be at a competitive disadvantage.

But its not just 154,000 routes though is it?! If we all start
doing this at a much increased rate [as we've seen in recent times]
then it will be more like 1,540,000 routes.

When we cleaned the issue from 8220 we found that a lot of the issues 
were config issues and ancient history transient workarounds for 
problems that were not fixed after the event. The issue we see is 
bad aggregation - the root cause is bad practise and processes 
that manifest into bad aggregation. I would argue that 
networks with poor aggregation are also networks that will tend to 
have more routeing issues and other outages although I have no
data to back that claim up.

> Coincidentally, the largest networks also spend the most with 
> their vendors and get to tell the vendors what they want in 
> the next generation of boxes they buy.

And look how well that's worked out not notably on this issue.