[134045] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: IPv6 BGP table size comparisons
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Jared Mauch)
Wed Dec 22 07:39:22 2010
From: Jared Mauch <jared@puck.nether.net>
In-Reply-To: <alpine.LRH.2.02.1012221355250.23446@netcore.fi>
Date: Wed, 22 Dec 2010 07:38:34 -0500
To: Pekka Savola <pekkas@netcore.fi>
Cc: nanog@nanog.org
Errors-To: nanog-bounces+nanog.discuss=bloom-picayune.mit.edu@nanog.org
On Dec 22, 2010, at 6:59 AM, Pekka Savola wrote:
> This would provide statistics and might be useful from historical POV, =
but I fear the operational impact of published IPv4 Routing Table =
reports is close to zero. (E.g. 'does it help in making people stop =
advertising unnecessary more-specific routes?'.) I don't expect that to =
change.
Actually, at the last NANOG meeting there was some value in calling out =
one ISP. They didn't respond publicly but several folks came over and =
said they were going to take corrective action.
- Jared=
