[155366] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: BGPttH. Neustar can do it, why can't we?
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Owen DeLong)
Mon Aug 6 16:07:32 2012
From: Owen DeLong <owen@delong.com>
In-Reply-To: <CAP-guGUM6eRbBzp8YmWTnTD2pf7EmEzr383D+6W6Co5gL=OeYw@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 6 Aug 2012 13:03:10 -0700
To: William Herrin <bill@herrin.us>
Cc: NANOG list <nanog@nanog.org>
Errors-To: nanog-bounces+nanog.discuss=bloom-picayune.mit.edu@nanog.org
On Aug 6, 2012, at 07:27 , William Herrin <bill@herrin.us> wrote:
> On Mon, Aug 6, 2012 at 10:08 AM, Christopher Morrow
> <morrowc.lists@gmail.com> wrote:
>> On Mon, Aug 6, 2012 at 9:07 AM, William Herrin <bill@herrin.us> =
wrote:
>>> As much as I'd love for
>>> Verizon to offer BGP directly over FIOS there are fewer than 40,000
>>=20
>> I'm curious as to your number... where is that from?
>> Marhsall had noted a number of 'small businesses' in the US at ~1.4m
>> as of ~2006ish?
>=20
> Hi Chris,
>=20
> Lacking any reason to believe otherwise, I estimate the number of BGP
> users at reasonably close to the number of autonomous systems in the
> Internet BGP table. Technically that doesn't have to be true... but
> given the debugging nuissance associated with private AS numbers and
> the trivial ease and cost with which an AS is registered it seems
> likely to me.
>=20
This ignores the probability that cost effective BGP service =
availability would
strongly drive demand for AS Numbers and adoption of the technology.
Owen
