https://www.cidr-report.org/cgi-bin/plota?file=%2fvar%2fdata%2fbgp%2fas2.0%2fbgp%2dactive%2etxt&descr=Active%20BGP%20entries%20%28FIB%29&ylabel=Active%20BGP%20entries%20%28FIB%29&with=step
"big enough" equipment from not that long ago couldn't carry a full table today (or tomorrow).
From: "Joe Maimon" <jmaimon@jmaimon.com>
To: "Mike Hammett" <nanog@ics-il.net>, "Tom Beecher" <beecher@beecher.cc>
Cc: "NANOG" <nanog@nanog.org>
Sent: Thursday, January 5, 2023 2:22:22 PM
Subject: Re: SDN Internet Router (sir)
Lots of 1M tcam fib limits in older gear.......
So yeah, its the same problem, bigger numbers and still not solved in
any sort of non-painful or expensive way.
I think Ill explore the google path and paper on it again.
Joe
Mike Hammett wrote:
> Then please bless the world with the right way.
>
> You acknowledge that not every router in a network needs to be fully
> DFZ capable, but then crap on my desire to have more than a default
> route in one.
>
>
>
> -----
> Mike Hammett
> Intelligent Computing Solutions <http://www.ics-il.com/>
> <https://www.facebook.com/ICSIL><https://plus.google.com/+IntelligentComputingSolutionsDeKalb><https://www.linkedin.com/company/intelligent-computing-solutions><https://twitter.com/ICSIL>
> Midwest Internet Exchange <http://www.midwest-ix.com/>
> <https://www.facebook.com/mdwestix><https://www.linkedin.com/company/midwest-internet-exchange><https://twitter.com/mdwestix>
> The Brothers WISP <http://www.thebrotherswisp.com/>
> <https://www.facebook.com/thebrotherswisp><https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCXSdfxQv7SpoRQYNyLwntZg>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> *From: *"Tom Beecher" <beecher@beecher.cc>
> *To: *"Mike Hammett" <nanog@ics-il.net>
> *Cc: *"Mel Beckman" <mel@beckman.org>, "NANOG" <nanog@nanog.org>
> *Sent: *Thursday, January 5, 2023 9:55:38 AM
> *Subject: *Re: SDN Internet Router (sir)
>
> "The right tool for the job" gets into a religious argument in
> assuming that one's way to do the job is the only reasonable way
> to do the job
>
>
> I disagree that it's religious. I completely agree there are locations
> in networks that having full DFZ capable routers doesn't make
> technical or economic sense. But there have long been different
> products for those different use cases.
>
> To perhaps explain my viewpoint better,(and perhaps I didn't properly
> comprehend the problem you're aiming to solve) :
>
> If you are trying to use SDN stuff to shuffle routes on and off a box
> because you have the wrong sized routers in place, then I would argue
> you're doing it wrong.
>
> If you are trying to use SDN stuff to (as Christopher mentioned) make
> decisions that are not strictly LPM, and the equipment you have cannot
> do that, then that's different and entirely reasonable.
>
> If the second use case is more of what you were asking, then I
> apologize for misunderstanding.
>
>
> On Thu, Jan 5, 2023 at 9:57 AM Mike Hammett <nanog@ics-il.net
> <mailto:nanog@ics-il.net>> wrote:
>
> "The right tool for the job" gets into a religious argument in
> assuming that one's way to do the job is the only reasonable way
> to do the job.
>
> Large networks historically have a very poor (IMO) model of
> gigantic iron in a few locations, which results in sub-optimal
> routing for the rest of their network between those large POPs.
> I've heard time and time again that someone buying service from a
> major network in say New Orleans has a first hop of Dallas or
> Atlanta. I agree that full-route capable routers need to be in the
> large, central locations, but it isn't cost effective to have them
> at every POP, especially if you're a last-mile provider.
>
> I'd go into more examples of where it doesn't make sense to have
> full-route routers everywhere, but I'm afraid that the Internet
> would then focus on the examples instead of the core idea of
> intelligently putting routes into the FIBs of low-FIB routers
> throughout my network.
>
>
>
> -----
> Mike Hammett
> Intelligent Computing Solutions <http://www.ics-il.com/>
> <https://www.facebook.com/ICSIL><https://plus.google.com/+IntelligentComputingSolutionsDeKalb><https://www.linkedin.com/company/intelligent-computing-solutions><https://twitter.com/ICSIL>
> Midwest Internet Exchange <http://www.midwest-ix.com/>
> <https://www.facebook.com/mdwestix><https://www.linkedin.com/company/midwest-internet-exchange><https://twitter.com/mdwestix>
> The Brothers WISP <http://www.thebrotherswisp.com/>
> <https://www.facebook.com/thebrotherswisp><https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCXSdfxQv7SpoRQYNyLwntZg>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> *From: *"Tom Beecher" <beecher@beecher.cc <mailto:beecher@beecher.cc>>
> *To: *"Mike Hammett" <nanog@ics-il.net <mailto:nanog@ics-il.net>>
> *Cc: *"Mel Beckman" <mel@beckman.org <mailto:mel@beckman.org>>,
> "NANOG" <nanog@nanog.org <mailto:nanog@nanog.org>>
> *Sent: *Wednesday, January 4, 2023 7:36:58 AM
> *Subject: *Re: SDN Internet Router (sir)
>
> Disagree that it’s a line in the sand. It’s use the right tool for
> the job.
>
> If a device is low FIB, it’s that way for a reason. There are
> plenty of ways to massage that with policy and software, depending
> on capabilities , but at the end of the day, trying to sort 10
> pounds of shit to store in a 5 pound bag is eventually going to
> end up the same way.
>
> On Tue, Jan 3, 2023 at 13:18 Mike Hammett <nanog@ics-il.net
> <mailto:nanog@ics-il.net>> wrote:
>
> There are likely more networks with 10 gigabit or less total
> external capacity than there are with more.
>
> Creating imaginary lines in the sand doesn't really help anyone.
>
>
>
>
> -----
> Mike Hammett
> Intelligent Computing Solutions <http://www.ics-il.com/>
> <https://www.facebook.com/ICSIL><https://plus.google.com/+IntelligentComputingSolutionsDeKalb><https://www.linkedin.com/company/intelligent-computing-solutions><https://twitter.com/ICSIL>
> Midwest Internet Exchange <http://www.midwest-ix.com/>
> <https://www.facebook.com/mdwestix><https://www.linkedin.com/company/midwest-internet-exchange><https://twitter.com/mdwestix>
> The Brothers WISP <http://www.thebrotherswisp.com/>
> <https://www.facebook.com/thebrotherswisp><https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCXSdfxQv7SpoRQYNyLwntZg>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> *From: *"Mel Beckman" <mel@beckman.org <mailto:mel@beckman.org>>
> *To: *"Mike Hammett" <nanog@ics-il.net <mailto:nanog@ics-il.net>>
> *Cc: *"NANOG" <nanog@nanog.org <mailto:nanog@nanog.org>>
> *Sent: *Tuesday, January 3, 2023 10:57:34 AM
> *Subject: *Re: SDN Internet Router (sir)
>
> It’s not a problem, due to cheap, plentiful high-speed memory
> and rapid prefix search silicon in backbone routers. The
> entire Internet routing table consumes at most a few gigabytes
> when fully structured (and only a few hundred Mbytes stored
> flat). That’s less memory than your average laptop sports.
>
>
> Even in the worst case scenario, where every network decides
> to announce only its most specific prefixes, the BGP backbone
> would temporarily enter an oscillating state that generates a
> large number of routing updates into the inter-domain routing
> space. In this case, BGP route damping will quickly suppress
> the crazies while the backbone stabilizes.
>
>
> Small routers should not be taking full tables, since there is
> no point to them being in the default free zone. For large
> routers, neither memory nor CPU speed are an issue. High-speed
> routers operating in the default-free zone have a critical
> path in the forwarding decision for each packet: it needs to
> take less than the inter-packet arrival time for minimum-sized
> IP packets.
>
>
> This is easy to achieve with today’s hardware. A router line
> card with an aggregate line rate across all of its
> point-to-point interfaces of 10Tbps (readily available in
> today’s gear) can process packets with just a handful of
> cycles in the FIB Ternary Content Addressable Memory (TCAM)
> using ASIC-assisted lookups. TCAM is the most expensive
> component you’re paying for in such a router. It’s not cheap,
> but backbone routers don’t need to be cheap. They just need to
> not be memory-constrained.
>
>
> -mel via cell
>
> On Jan 3, 2023, at 7:47 AM, Mike Hammett <nanog@ics-il.net
> <mailto:nanog@ics-il.net>> wrote:
>
>
> https://github.com/dbarrosop/sir
>
> I came across this over the weekend. Given that the
> project was abandoned six years ago, are there any other
> efforts with a similar goal (more intelligently placing
> routes into FIBs of low-FIB capacity devices?
>
>
>
> -----
> Mike Hammett
> Intelligent Computing Solutions <http://www.ics-il.com/>
> <https://www.facebook.com/ICSIL><https://plus.google.com/+IntelligentComputingSolutionsDeKalb><https://www.linkedin.com/company/intelligent-computing-solutions><https://twitter.com/ICSIL>
> Midwest Internet Exchange <http://www.midwest-ix.com/>
> <https://www.facebook.com/mdwestix><https://www.linkedin.com/company/midwest-internet-exchange><https://twitter.com/mdwestix>
> The Brothers WISP <http://www.thebrotherswisp.com/>
> <https://www.facebook.com/thebrotherswisp><https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCXSdfxQv7SpoRQYNyLwntZg>
>
>
>
>
To: "Mike Hammett" <nanog@ics-il.net>, "Tom Beecher" <beecher@beecher.cc>
Cc: "NANOG" <nanog@nanog.org>
Sent: Thursday, January 5, 2023 2:22:22 PM
Subject: Re: SDN Internet Router (sir)
Lots of 1M tcam fib limits in older gear.......
So yeah, its the same problem, bigger numbers and still not solved in
any sort of non-painful or expensive way.
I think Ill explore the google path and paper on it again.
Joe
Mike Hammett wrote:
> Then please bless the world with the right way.
>
> You acknowledge that not every router in a network needs to be fully
> DFZ capable, but then crap on my desire to have more than a default
> route in one.
>
>
>
> -----
> Mike Hammett
> Intelligent Computing Solutions <http://www.ics-il.com/>
> <https://www.facebook.com/ICSIL><https://plus.google.com/+IntelligentComputingSolutionsDeKalb><https://www.linkedin.com/company/intelligent-computing-solutions><https://twitter.com/ICSIL>
> Midwest Internet Exchange <http://www.midwest-ix.com/>
> <https://www.facebook.com/mdwestix><https://www.linkedin.com/company/midwest-internet-exchange><https://twitter.com/mdwestix>
> The Brothers WISP <http://www.thebrotherswisp.com/>
> <https://www.facebook.com/thebrotherswisp><https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCXSdfxQv7SpoRQYNyLwntZg>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> *From: *"Tom Beecher" <beecher@beecher.cc>
> *To: *"Mike Hammett" <nanog@ics-il.net>
> *Cc: *"Mel Beckman" <mel@beckman.org>, "NANOG" <nanog@nanog.org>
> *Sent: *Thursday, January 5, 2023 9:55:38 AM
> *Subject: *Re: SDN Internet Router (sir)
>
> "The right tool for the job" gets into a religious argument in
> assuming that one's way to do the job is the only reasonable way
> to do the job
>
>
> I disagree that it's religious. I completely agree there are locations
> in networks that having full DFZ capable routers doesn't make
> technical or economic sense. But there have long been different
> products for those different use cases.
>
> To perhaps explain my viewpoint better,(and perhaps I didn't properly
> comprehend the problem you're aiming to solve) :
>
> If you are trying to use SDN stuff to shuffle routes on and off a box
> because you have the wrong sized routers in place, then I would argue
> you're doing it wrong.
>
> If you are trying to use SDN stuff to (as Christopher mentioned) make
> decisions that are not strictly LPM, and the equipment you have cannot
> do that, then that's different and entirely reasonable.
>
> If the second use case is more of what you were asking, then I
> apologize for misunderstanding.
>
>
> On Thu, Jan 5, 2023 at 9:57 AM Mike Hammett <nanog@ics-il.net
> <mailto:nanog@ics-il.net>> wrote:
>
> "The right tool for the job" gets into a religious argument in
> assuming that one's way to do the job is the only reasonable way
> to do the job.
>
> Large networks historically have a very poor (IMO) model of
> gigantic iron in a few locations, which results in sub-optimal
> routing for the rest of their network between those large POPs.
> I've heard time and time again that someone buying service from a
> major network in say New Orleans has a first hop of Dallas or
> Atlanta. I agree that full-route capable routers need to be in the
> large, central locations, but it isn't cost effective to have them
> at every POP, especially if you're a last-mile provider.
>
> I'd go into more examples of where it doesn't make sense to have
> full-route routers everywhere, but I'm afraid that the Internet
> would then focus on the examples instead of the core idea of
> intelligently putting routes into the FIBs of low-FIB routers
> throughout my network.
>
>
>
> -----
> Mike Hammett
> Intelligent Computing Solutions <http://www.ics-il.com/>
> <https://www.facebook.com/ICSIL><https://plus.google.com/+IntelligentComputingSolutionsDeKalb><https://www.linkedin.com/company/intelligent-computing-solutions><https://twitter.com/ICSIL>
> Midwest Internet Exchange <http://www.midwest-ix.com/>
> <https://www.facebook.com/mdwestix><https://www.linkedin.com/company/midwest-internet-exchange><https://twitter.com/mdwestix>
> The Brothers WISP <http://www.thebrotherswisp.com/>
> <https://www.facebook.com/thebrotherswisp><https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCXSdfxQv7SpoRQYNyLwntZg>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> *From: *"Tom Beecher" <beecher@beecher.cc <mailto:beecher@beecher.cc>>
> *To: *"Mike Hammett" <nanog@ics-il.net <mailto:nanog@ics-il.net>>
> *Cc: *"Mel Beckman" <mel@beckman.org <mailto:mel@beckman.org>>,
> "NANOG" <nanog@nanog.org <mailto:nanog@nanog.org>>
> *Sent: *Wednesday, January 4, 2023 7:36:58 AM
> *Subject: *Re: SDN Internet Router (sir)
>
> Disagree that it’s a line in the sand. It’s use the right tool for
> the job.
>
> If a device is low FIB, it’s that way for a reason. There are
> plenty of ways to massage that with policy and software, depending
> on capabilities , but at the end of the day, trying to sort 10
> pounds of shit to store in a 5 pound bag is eventually going to
> end up the same way.
>
> On Tue, Jan 3, 2023 at 13:18 Mike Hammett <nanog@ics-il.net
> <mailto:nanog@ics-il.net>> wrote:
>
> There are likely more networks with 10 gigabit or less total
> external capacity than there are with more.
>
> Creating imaginary lines in the sand doesn't really help anyone.
>
>
>
>
> -----
> Mike Hammett
> Intelligent Computing Solutions <http://www.ics-il.com/>
> <https://www.facebook.com/ICSIL><https://plus.google.com/+IntelligentComputingSolutionsDeKalb><https://www.linkedin.com/company/intelligent-computing-solutions><https://twitter.com/ICSIL>
> Midwest Internet Exchange <http://www.midwest-ix.com/>
> <https://www.facebook.com/mdwestix><https://www.linkedin.com/company/midwest-internet-exchange><https://twitter.com/mdwestix>
> The Brothers WISP <http://www.thebrotherswisp.com/>
> <https://www.facebook.com/thebrotherswisp><https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCXSdfxQv7SpoRQYNyLwntZg>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> *From: *"Mel Beckman" <mel@beckman.org <mailto:mel@beckman.org>>
> *To: *"Mike Hammett" <nanog@ics-il.net <mailto:nanog@ics-il.net>>
> *Cc: *"NANOG" <nanog@nanog.org <mailto:nanog@nanog.org>>
> *Sent: *Tuesday, January 3, 2023 10:57:34 AM
> *Subject: *Re: SDN Internet Router (sir)
>
> It’s not a problem, due to cheap, plentiful high-speed memory
> and rapid prefix search silicon in backbone routers. The
> entire Internet routing table consumes at most a few gigabytes
> when fully structured (and only a few hundred Mbytes stored
> flat). That’s less memory than your average laptop sports.
>
>
> Even in the worst case scenario, where every network decides
> to announce only its most specific prefixes, the BGP backbone
> would temporarily enter an oscillating state that generates a
> large number of routing updates into the inter-domain routing
> space. In this case, BGP route damping will quickly suppress
> the crazies while the backbone stabilizes.
>
>
> Small routers should not be taking full tables, since there is
> no point to them being in the default free zone. For large
> routers, neither memory nor CPU speed are an issue. High-speed
> routers operating in the default-free zone have a critical
> path in the forwarding decision for each packet: it needs to
> take less than the inter-packet arrival time for minimum-sized
> IP packets.
>
>
> This is easy to achieve with today’s hardware. A router line
> card with an aggregate line rate across all of its
> point-to-point interfaces of 10Tbps (readily available in
> today’s gear) can process packets with just a handful of
> cycles in the FIB Ternary Content Addressable Memory (TCAM)
> using ASIC-assisted lookups. TCAM is the most expensive
> component you’re paying for in such a router. It’s not cheap,
> but backbone routers don’t need to be cheap. They just need to
> not be memory-constrained.
>
>
> -mel via cell
>
> On Jan 3, 2023, at 7:47 AM, Mike Hammett <nanog@ics-il.net
> <mailto:nanog@ics-il.net>> wrote:
>
>
> https://github.com/dbarrosop/sir
>
> I came across this over the weekend. Given that the
> project was abandoned six years ago, are there any other
> efforts with a similar goal (more intelligently placing
> routes into FIBs of low-FIB capacity devices?
>
>
>
> -----
> Mike Hammett
> Intelligent Computing Solutions <http://www.ics-il.com/>
> <https://www.facebook.com/ICSIL><https://plus.google.com/+IntelligentComputingSolutionsDeKalb><https://www.linkedin.com/company/intelligent-computing-solutions><https://twitter.com/ICSIL>
> Midwest Internet Exchange <http://www.midwest-ix.com/>
> <https://www.facebook.com/mdwestix><https://www.linkedin.com/company/midwest-internet-exchange><https://twitter.com/mdwestix>
> The Brothers WISP <http://www.thebrotherswisp.com/>
> <https://www.facebook.com/thebrotherswisp><https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCXSdfxQv7SpoRQYNyLwntZg>
>
>
>
>