27 Nov
1995
27 Nov
'95
12:52 p.m.
Our route table has: *> 198.111.252.0 192.41.177.145 <--- agis *> 198.111.252.0/22 192.41.177.181 <--- mci *> 198.111.253.0 192.41.177.145 <--- agis *> 198.111.255.0 192.41.177.145 <--- agis
This isn't what agis is supposed to be announcing, I'll have to ask them again to announce 198.111.252/22. There's a couple less routes already :-). Once that is fixed, further aggregation of 198.111.252.0 (say into 198.111/16, as a non real example) would change our routing (in ways we don't want it changed), even with your "next hop the same" criteria because of the additional meaning that specifics have in terms of priority. I agree that your tool is usefull in identifying _potential_ savings.