[134017] in North American Network Operators' Group
RE: IPv6 BGP table size comparisons
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Frank Bulk)
Tue Dec 21 17:18:37 2010
X-Barracuda-Envelope-From: frnkblk@iname.com
From: "Frank Bulk" <frnkblk@iname.com>
To: "NANOG list" <nanog@nanog.org>
In-Reply-To: <4D10F85B.2050800@bryanfields.net>
Date: Tue, 21 Dec 2010 16:18:18 -0600
Reply-To: frnkblk@iname.com
Errors-To: nanog-bounces+nanog.discuss=bloom-picayune.mit.edu@nanog.org
There are 4,035 routes in the global IPv6 routing table. This is what one
provider passed on to me for routes (/48 or larger prefixes), extracted from
public route-view servers.
AT&T AS7018: 2,851 (70.7%)
Cogent AS174: 2,864 (71.0%)
GLBX AS3549: 3,706 (91.8%)
Hurricane Electric AS6939: 3,790 (93.9%)
Qwest AS209: 3,918 (97.1%)
TINET (formerly Tiscali) AS3257: 3,825 (94.8%)
Verizon AS701: 3,938 (97.6%)
Frank
-----Original Message-----
From: Bryan Fields [mailto:Bryan@bryanfields.net]
Sent: Tuesday, December 21, 2010 12:56 PM
To: NANOG list
Subject: Re: IPv6 BGP table size comparisons
On 12/21/2010 11:32, Frank Bulk wrote:
> A week or more ago someone posted in NANOG or elsewhere a site that had
made
> a comparison of the IPv6 BGP table sizes of different operators (i.e. HE,
> Cogent, Sprint, etc), making the point that a full view might take
multiple
> feeds. I think that website also had text files with the comparisons.
Whip yours out and lets have an on list comparison of table sizes
:-D
--
Bryan Fields
727-409-1194 - Voice
727-214-2508 - Fax
http://bryanfields.net
