On Thu, 30 Jun 2011, Randy Bush wrote:
My understanding is that routing table growth is largely fueled by traffic engineering rather than multihoming.
got cites?
I think the routing table report "aggregation ratio" shows some of this. It might also be incompetence rather than intentional traffic engineering, that is fueling the growth. I know people who deaggregate their /19 into /24s and announce it to all their providers, because they have one per city and if that city is isolated, it still has connectivity even if their internal network is partitioned. If this should be called "traffic engineering" or not is debatable.
From the routing table report:
BGP routing table entries examined: 361681 Prefixes after maximum aggregation: 164222 I don't have figures showing these metrics over time, but I feel that de-aggregation ratio has increased, but not hugely. As long as announcing routes to the DFZ doesn't incur a cost per route, we're going to see the current situation continue, I guess. Luckily it seems core routing platforms keep up with the growth, even though platforms need to be upgraded prematurely due to them not being able to handle the current DFZ size. -- Mikael Abrahamsson email: swmike@swm.pp.se