Date: Tue, 2 Sep 2003 11:28:44 -0700 (PDT) From: Tom <tom@light.sdf.com> To: Haesu <haesu@towardex.com> Cc: freebsd-isp@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Multi-Homed Routing Message-ID: <20030902112259.C63339@light.sdf.com> In-Reply-To: <20030902171751.GA42133@scylla.towardex.com> References: <0AF1BBDF1218F14E9B4CCE414744E70F07DF30@exchange.wanglobal.net> <20030902144649.GA34440@scylla.towardex.com> <20030902171751.GA42133@scylla.towardex.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Tue, 2 Sep 2003, Haesu wrote: > < snip > > > > > > Yes, most carriers do use them. But a major carrier is not going to use > > some fly-by-night route registry. In fact, several carriers operate their > > own registries, and don't trust information from anywhere else. > > Ohhh yes, and they also mirror other IRR db's too. Some do, and some don't. CW RR doesn't mirror RADB RR for instance. > > And you sure they are getting farther than that? I see only three /24s > > from your AS (presumably 27552), and a /21 and a /22. > > www.cidr-report.org They also provide view from three different ASes. Let see > how many /24's you can count. Only three are visible to me here, which shows there is a proprogation problem of some sort. > > > > At least 10% of the routes in the table are unnecessary. > > No, you meant to say 28.8% gain by fixing deaggregates 28.8% is greater than 10%, and I said that more than 10% of the routing table is junk. > -hc > > -- > Sincerely, > Haesu C. > TowardEX Technologies, Inc. > WWW: http://www.towardex.com > E-mail: haesu@towardex.com > Cell: (978) 394-2867 Tom
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20030902112259.C63339>