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

Re: Route table growth and hardware limits...talk to the filter

  • From: Russ White
  • Date: Sat Sep 08 18:20:36 2007
  • Authentication-results: sj-dkim-3; [email protected]; dkim=pass (sig from cisco.com/sjdkim3002 verified; );
  • Dkim-signature: v=0.5; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; l=1014; t=1189289629; x=1190153629; c=relaxed/simple; s=sjdkim3002; h=Content-Type:From:Subject:Content-Transfer-Encoding:MIME-Version; d=cisco.com; [email protected]; z=From:=20Russ=20White=20<[email protected]> |Subject:=20Re=3A=20Route=20table=20growth=20and=20hardware=20limits...ta lk=20to=20the=20filter |Sender:=20; bh=P75IA90kWu6QooBvEGbh4YKIXYKKapeU5waZ6/huGqc=; b=fNzjRWBqL76NAiRC1omMJQMPZp802nhfP+tTiOoodmhUNosrr18g80vz2hg3Jzi9V58Q2E4z iiVWs8VOpzwI7/tRPBcW7NUZTHtDJnaEcphUpZacZPBgxo1iAWhPmz/4;
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1


> Maybe this is a dumb question, but why isn't there a BGP option to just
> filter more specific routes that have the same AS path as the larger
> aggregate?  This would allow the networks that announce more specifics for
> traffic engineering to still accomplish that, while throwing away the
> garbage from someone else that decides to announce their /19 as 33 routes
> for no apparent reason.  Sure, this would fail if a network decided to 
> only announce /24's for example without a larger aggregate, but how many 
> networks are really doing that?

http://www3.ietf.org/proceedings/03nov/I-D/draft-grow-bounded-longest-match-00.txt

As a matter of fact.

:-)

Russ

- --
[email protected] CCIE <>< Grace Alone

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (MingW32)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org

iD8DBQFG4x6KER27sUhU9OQRAs/ZAJ9LARtnoo7YUshwBCuGyj/fVO7MJACg/2AI
Qe6P+ImcLKnan97HlwmYVjQ=
=zgmF
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----