[nsp] BGP Entries - Comparison

[Paul Stewart]

Thanks to everyone for your feedback....:)

It's only the one provider who is sending small subnets and wasting table
sizes so I've contacted them (Bell Nexxia - Canada) to ask if this is
standard for them or are we a special exception for some reason <lol>

They are actually sending us over 3000 /29's for example, even /30's... The
other two providers are not sending anything below /24's

Thanks again to everyone on the list...

Paul


-----Original Message-----
From: Pete Templin [mailto:petelists at templin.org] 
Sent: Wednesday, June 16, 2004 10:56 AM
To: Paul Stewart
Cc: cisco-nsp at puck.nether.net
Subject: Re: [nsp] BGP Entries - Comparison


Paul Stewart wrote:

> I'm trying to diagnose why our upstream providers have some varying 
> numbers of routes coming to us...
> 
> Provider A has 136992
> Provider B has 141471
> Provider C has 121855
> 
> These are three full feeds coming into us... Why the huge difference 
> in numbers?  I realize that there will be differences based on 
> connectivity etc. but that much??

Could be a reflection of transit vs. peering arrangements, density of 
longer customer subnets that they're sending you, etc.

> Is anyone cutting tables off at /24 and what has your experience been?  
> I thought for some reason that you were not even allowed to advertise 
> any subnets smaller than /24's via BGP anyways or am I dreaming? :)

I currently have two pipes to InterNAP, and I'm cutting off at /24 from 
them.  Last time I checked, I was rejecting less than 100 routes on each 
pipe that were longer than /24.

pt