[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

IPv6 BGP table size comparisons

Subject: IPv6 BGP table size comparisons
From: owen at delong.com (Owen DeLong)
Date: Wed, 22 Dec 2010 08:11:01 -0800
In-reply-to: <[email protected]>
References: <!&!AAAAAAAAAAAuAAAAAAAAAKTyXRN5/+lGvU59a+P7CFMBAN6gY+ZG84BMpVQcAbDh1IQAAAATbSgAABAAAACxBkw5QKESRLPlwbIdBE4HAQAAAAA=@iname.com> <[email protected]> <!&!AAAAAAAAAAAuAAAAAAAAAKTyXRN5/+lGvU59a+P7CFMBAN6gY+ZG84BMpVQcAbDh1IQAAAATbSgAABAAAAAEThYncSqKTaelGbK7oMrRAQAAAAA=@iname.com> <[email protected]> <[email protected]> <[email protected]> <[email protected]> <[email protected]>

> 
>> I would really love to see weekly Routing Reports for IPv6 as we have
>> them for legacy IP rather sooner than later.
> 
> This would provide statistics and might be useful from historical POV, but I fear the operational impact of published IPv4 Routing Table reports is close to zero. (E.g. 'does it help in making people stop advertising unnecessary more-specific routes?'.)  I don't expect that to change.

Today, probably not much. In the past when it started, yes, a great deal.

Owen

References:
- IPv6 BGP table size comparisons
  - From: frnkblk at iname.com (Frank Bulk)
- IPv6 BGP table size comparisons
  - From: Bryan at bryanfields.net (Bryan Fields)
- IPv6 BGP table size comparisons
  - From: frnkblk at iname.com (Frank Bulk)
- IPv6 BGP table size comparisons
  - From: sethm at rollernet.us (Seth Mattinen)
- IPv6 BGP table size comparisons
  - From: jsw at inconcepts.biz (Jeff Wheeler)
- IPv6 BGP table size comparisons
  - From: pekkas at netcore.fi (Pekka Savola)
- IPv6 BGP table size comparisons
  - From: bzeeb-lists at lists.zabbadoz.net (Bjoern A. Zeeb)
- IPv6 BGP table size comparisons
  - From: pekkas at netcore.fi (Pekka Savola)

Prev by Date: C/D[WDM]
Next by Date: TCP congestion control and large router buffers
Previous by thread: IPv6 BGP table size comparisons
Next by thread: IPv6 BGP table size comparisons
Index(es):
- Date
- Thread