[c-nsp] BGP table growth and memory

[Justin M. Streiner]

On Mon, 20 Jun 2005, Rick Ernst wrote:

> I'm surely not the first person to notice this, so I have to wonder what
> kind of plans/forecast other small/medium providers have, other than a
> forklift upgrade.

I think you'll see a few different things happen, depending on an 
organization's specific situation.  Not that I'm not saying what's right 
or wrong here - that could easily turn this list into NANOG :-)

1) For smaller operations that are cash-strapped, you'll probably see more
 	people trying to upgrade whatever they have, if at all possible.
 	Example, people with 7200VXR + NPE-300s will probably upgrade to
 	-400s or an NPE-G1 to stretch as many miles out of that chassis
 	as they possibly can.

2) People will begin to bite the bullet and upgrade to platforms with
 	more abundant resources.  Whether someone chooses to buy new or
 	somd something on the secondary market is an exercise for the
 	reader.  Some organizations may use the opportunity to switch
 	vendors as well.

3) People will more aggressively question whether they really need to
 	carry full BGP routes or not.  End users who operate in an
 	active-passive mode on their transit pipes could get by with two
 	defaults.  Small transit providers who have downstreams who need
 	full routes for whatever reason will likely have to review option
 	2.  End users who still need some degree of route selection but
 	don't want to pony up for newer routers might explore partial feed
 	options.

jms