[134025] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: IPv6 BGP table size comparisons
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (ML)
Tue Dec 21 20:10:20 2010
Date: Tue, 21 Dec 2010 20:10:05 -0500
From: ML <ml@kenweb.org>
To: nanog@nanog.org
In-Reply-To: <4D1141FF.6000005@sentex.net>
Reply-To: ml@kenweb.org
Errors-To: nanog-bounces+nanog.discuss=bloom-picayune.mit.edu@nanog.org
On 12/21/2010 7:10 PM, Mike Tancsa wrote:
> On 12/21/2010 5:18 PM, Frank Bulk wrote:
>> 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%)
>
> TATA (AS6453) out of Toronto, Canada 3,747.
>
> For my v4 transit, I only see 0.3% difference from my largest and
> smallest view. Where as with ipv6, the difference is almost 25%. For
> /48 and shorter, I see 757 paths missing from AS174 that I see on my
> other 2 v6 transit providers.
>
> ---Mike
>
HE routes missing on Cogents side?
