Ryan Malayter wrote:
If the number of routes in DFZ is, say, 100, many routers and hosts will be default free
For quite some time, a sub-$2000 PC running Linux/BSD has been able to cope with DFZ table sizes and handle enough packets per second to saturate two or more if the prevalent LAN interfaces of the day.
What if, you run windows?
The reason current routers in the core are so expensive is because of the 40 gigabit interfaces, custom ASICs to handle billions of PPS, esoteric features, and lack of competition.
The point of http://bill.herrin.us/network/bgpcost.html was that routers are more expensive because of bloated routing table. If you deny it, you must deny its conclusion.
The fact that long-haul fiber is very expensive to run limits the number of DFZ routers more than anything else.
Given that global routing table is bloated because of site multihoming, where the site uses multiple ISPs within a city, costs of long-haul fiber is irrelevant.
Why not take a default route and simplify life when you're at the end of a single coax link?
That's fine.
If your lucky enough to have access to fiber from multiple providers, the cost of a router which can handle a full table is not a major concern compared with your monthly recurring charges.
As it costs less than $100 per month to have fiber from a local ISP, having them from multiple ISPs costs a lot less is negligible compared to having routers with a so bloated routing table. Masataka Ohta