North American Network Operators Group
Date Prev | Date Next | Date Index | Thread Index | Author Index | Historical

Re: 200K prefixes - Weekly Routing Table Report

  • From: Philip Smith
  • Date: Fri Oct 13 15:07:15 2006
  • Authentication-results: sj-dkim-4.cisco.com; [email protected]; dkim=pass (2 extraneous bytes; sig from cisco.com verified; );
  • Dkim-signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; l=884; t=1160766248; x=1161630248;c=relaxed/simple; s=sjdkim4002; h=Content-Type:From:Subject:Content-Transfer-Encoding:MIME-Version;d=cisco.com; [email protected]; z=From:Philip=20Smith=20<[email protected]>|Subject:Re=3A=20200K=20prefixes=20-=20Weekly=20Routing=20Table=20Report;X=v=3Dcisco.com=3B=20h=3Du8KUmhvvWslVlyi+qcIDdDosyU0=3D; b=qYVEhgMJDLX61nhdorg3ibys/ZkGvKnEuh+9LJn4/fAlEBUgk637apBEKHpDvRSKgdDBTPpIqFe5OuKTnWrPiCA3J74/zU6lis8mQTZanB7eQpFxRew+UcbtsVjtadDQ;
Patrick W. Gilmore said the following on 14/10/06 04:16:
> 
> On Oct 13, 2006, at 2:02 PM, Routing Analysis Role Account wrote:
> 
>> BGP routing table entries examined:                              200339
>>     Prefixes after maximum aggregation:                          108814
> 
> Shall we all have a moment of silence for 200K prefixes in the global
> table.

My view actually hit 200k on Wednesday morning, then dipped back under
by a few hundred on Thursday.

I was kinda hoping that it would hit 200K on Tuesday, then I could have
added the announcement to my aggregation recommendations lightning talk!
;-) Bit sad that a 200K table can be aggregated down to 109k prefixes
with no loss of path information (in my BGP table view).

> Maybe reboot all our routers at once or something?

Who wants to go first...? Then again, maybe better not...

philip
--