[106094] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: virtual aggregation in IETF
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Joel Jaeggli)
Sun Jul 20 12:29:41 2008
Date: Sun, 20 Jul 2008 09:27:41 -0700
From: Joel Jaeggli <joelja@bogus.com>
To: Paul Francis <francis@cs.cornell.edu>
In-Reply-To: <37BC8961A005144C8F5B8E4AD226DE1109D951@EXCHANGE2.cs.cornell.edu>
Cc: nanog@nanog.org
Errors-To: nanog-bounces@nanog.org
Paul Francis wrote:
> Gang,
>
> I have submitted an internet-draft to the IDR group on virtual aggregation
> (VA) (http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-francis-idr-intra-va-00.txt).
> This draft suggests a few changes to routers that allow operators to control
> the size of their FIBs, shrinking them by 5x or 10x quite easily. This would
> extend the lifetime of routers that are constrained by FIB size.
>
> There has been a lively discussion of this on the IDR mailing list, including
> a suggestion that FIB reduction is more important for lower tier ISPs (tier
> 2, tier 3...) than for tier 1 ISPs. Unfortunately I don't think that people
> from smaller ISPs pay much attention to the IDR mailing list, so they are not
> being represented in this discussion.
Software switched routers have little pressure on fib limitions. For a
certain class of application the software switched edge router is in a
much better position to accommodate fib growth than a device with a
fixed sized cam.
If you're in the business of shopping for sup-2s on ebay you'll probably
see significant benefits in fib reduction.
> So I'm looking for input from folks who think that FIB reduction helps them,
> so as to better understand their requirements.
>
> Any help is much appreciated.
>
> Thanks,
>
> PF
>
>
