Does anybody have a working projection, or crystal ball, that can provide a recommendation on FIB size requirements for the next 24 months? Are we expecting the IPv4 table to continue to grow at somewhere around 50k routes a year? I came up with this from eyeballing the graph at http://www.cidr-report.org/cgi-bin/plota?file=%2fvar%2fdata%2fbgp%2fas2.0%2fbgp-active.txt&descr=Active%20BGP%20entries%20%28FIB%29&ylabel=Active%20BGP%20entries%20%28FIB%29&with=step. Thanks, Graham Johnston Network Planner Westman Communications Group 204.717.2829 johnstong@westmancom.com<mailto:johnstong@westmancom.com> P think green; don't print this email.
On Tue, Jul 21, 2015 at 4:57 PM, Graham Johnston <johnstong@westmancom.com> wrote:
Does anybody have a working projection, or crystal ball, that can provide a recommendation on FIB size requirements for the next 24 months? Are we expecting the IPv4 table to continue to grow at somewhere around 50k routes a year? I came up with this from eyeballing the graph at http://www.cidr-report.org/cgi-bin/plota?file=%2fvar%2fdata%2fbgp%2fas2.0%2fbgp-active.txt&descr=Active%20BGP%20entries%20%28FIB%29&ylabel=Active%20BGP%20entries%20%28FIB%29&with=step.
Hi Graham, The IPv4 BGP table has been growing by 10% to 15% per year since CIDR. It appears to be a compounding curve, not linear. IPv4 exhaustion is a new factor which may or may not impact the next 24 months' projection. There are arguments favoring a slower rate (no more free pool). There are arguments favoring a faster rate (fragmentation from address sales). No one has a crystal ball good enough to know for sure -- the situation is literally unprecedented. Regards, Bill Herrin -- William Herrin ................ herrin@dirtside.com bill@herrin.us Owner, Dirtside Systems ......... Web: <http://www.dirtside.com/>
On 22 July 2015 at 06:51, William Herrin <bill@herrin.us> wrote:
The IPv4 BGP table has been growing by 10% to 15% per year since CIDR. It appears to be a compounding curve, not linear.
IPv4 exhaustion is a new factor which may or may not impact the next 24 months' projection. There are arguments favoring a slower rate (no more free pool). There are arguments favoring a faster rate (fragmentation from address sales). No one has a crystal ball good enough to know for sure -- the situation is literally unprecedented.
When will router vendors learn to do even simple aggregation before loading routes into FIB? It appears that most hardware will have plenty of FIB space if this was done. Also that aggregated routes are increasing at a slower pace. Regards, Baldur
When de aggregation hit IPv6, with lot of /48
On 25 июля 2015 г., at 14:28, Baldur Norddahl <baldur.norddahl@gmail.com> wrote:
On 22 July 2015 at 06:51, William Herrin <bill@herrin.us> wrote:
The IPv4 BGP table has been growing by 10% to 15% per year since CIDR. It appears to be a compounding curve, not linear.
IPv4 exhaustion is a new factor which may or may not impact the next 24 months' projection. There are arguments favoring a slower rate (no more free pool). There are arguments favoring a faster rate (fragmentation from address sales). No one has a crystal ball good enough to know for sure -- the situation is literally unprecedented.
When will router vendors learn to do even simple aggregation before loading routes into FIB? It appears that most hardware will have plenty of FIB space if this was done. Also that aggregated routes are increasing at a slower pace.
Regards,
Baldur
On Sat, Jul 25, 2015 at 7:28 AM, Baldur Norddahl <baldur.norddahl@gmail.com> wrote:
When will router vendors learn to do even simple aggregation before loading routes into FIB? It appears that most hardware will have plenty of FIB space if this was done. Also that aggregated routes are increasing at a slower pace.
Howdy, You can get a good reduction with FIB aggregation, but only upwards of 50% or so, and that only with the some pretty costly algorithms. Also, you tend to get better gains at the cheaper edge nodes rather than the more expensive core nodes. For now it's more cost effective to leave the code alone and just double the size of the TCAM. Regards, Bill Herrin -- William Herrin ................ herrin@dirtside.com bill@herrin.us Owner, Dirtside Systems ......... Web: <http://www.dirtside.com/>
When will router vendors learn to do even simple aggregation before loading routes into FIB? It appears that most hardware will have plenty of FIB space if this was done. Also that aggregated routes are increasing at a slower pace.
Howdy,
You can get a good reduction with FIB aggregation, but only upwards of 50% or so, and that only with the some pretty costly algorithms. Also, you tend to get better gains at the cheaper edge nodes rather than the more expensive core nodes. For now it's more cost effective to leave the code alone and just double the size of the TCAM.
Regards, Bill Herrin
There are also features such as Selective RIB Download (or its equivalent in other vendors) which help out in different portions of the network. Definitely not applicable to all router types though.
participants (6)
-
Baldur Norddahl -
Graham Johnston -
Nikolay Shopik -
Pablo Lucena -
Randy Bush -
William Herrin