Re: [RAM] First cut at routing & addressing problem statement

[Jason Schiller <schiller at uu.net>]

> What do you mean by internal IPv4 table? In large IS, the number of
> routable prefixes in a router can easily reach 250k.

You can classify the routes in a large ISP as "Internet routes" these
prefixes also show up in the Internet table, and internal routes, these
are ones that are not advertised outside of the AS.

Currently the Internet table (DFZ) is rougly 230K.  ISPs carry an
additional 50K-150K internal prefixes that don't appear in the Internet
table (DFZ).  This does not include VPN routes.

In IS, the total number of routable prefixes (Internet + internal) in a
router can easily reach 380K.

I hope that answers your question.

Can you please look back at section 4.7 and see if the text is sufficent
or if more detail needs to be provided to make this clear.

__Jason    


==========================================================================
Jason Schiller                                               (703)886.6648
Senior Internet Network Engineer                         fax:(703)886.0512
Public IP Global Network Engineering                       schiller at uu.net
UUNET / Verizon                         jason.schiller at verizonbusiness.com

The good news about having an email address that is twice as long is that
it increases traffic on the Internet.

On Fri, 27 Jul 2007, Ricardo V. Oliveira wrote:

> Date: Fri, 27 Jul 2007 10:32:19 -0400
> From: Ricardo V. Oliveira <rveloso at cs.ucla.edu>
> To: ram at iab.org
> Subject: Re: [RAM] First cut at routing & addressing problem  statement
> 
> Hi Thomas,
> 
> Some minor comments on the draft:
> Sec 4.7:
> "For a large ISP, the internal IPv4 table can be between 50,000 and  
> 150,000 routes."
> What do you mean by internal IPv4 table? In large IS, the number of  
> routable prefixes in a router can easily reach 250k.
> 
>    The degree of interconnectedness between ASes has increased in recent
>     years.  That is, the Internet as whole is becoming "flatter" with an
>     increasing number of possible paths interconnecting sites [ref?]
> http://www.cs.ucla.edu/~rveloso/papers/fp163_oliveira.pdf has some  
> numbers for this in section 4.3.
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> --Ricardo
> 
> 
> On Jul 26, 2007, at 8:20 PM, Thomas Narten wrote:
> 
> > The Routing & Addressing directorate has been working on a strawman
> > problem statement since Prague. I just submitted our first cut as an
> > Internet Draft and it's available at:
> >
> > http://www.cs.duke.edu/~narten/ietf/draft-narten-radir-problem- 
> > statement-00.txt
> >
> > We would welcome comments on the document. In particular:
> >
> >  - Do folk agree with the problem statement as written, or are we
> >    missing something fairly fundamental?
> >
> >  - Are there other pressures on the routing system that we have not
> >    listed or described completely?
> >
> >  - We intentionally did not include improving mobility as a core
> >    "problem", as explained in the document. (That doesn't mean we
> >    don't recognize that some of the solutions under discussion may
> >    also be applicable to mobility scenarios. Rather, we tend to see
> >    improved mobility as a possible benefit of certain classes of
> >    solutions.)
> >
> >  - Are there other views of what folk perceive the core routing and
> >    addressing problem to be?
> >
> > Thomas
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > RAM mailing list
> > RAM at iab.org
> > https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ram
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> RAM mailing list
> RAM at iab.org
> https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ram
> 


_______________________________________________
RAM mailing list
RAM at iab.org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ram