Re: The Cidr Report

  • To: bmanning at isi dot edu (Bill Manning)
  • Subject: Re: The Cidr Report
  • From: "Alex.Bligh" <amb at xara dot net>
  • Date: Mon, 02 Dec 1996 15:14:51 +0000
  • Cc: amb at xara dot net (Alex.Bligh), tli at jnx dot com, pferguso at cisco dot com, nanog at merit dot edu, eof-list at ripe dot net, apops at apnic dot net
  • In-reply-to: Your message of "Mon, 02 Dec 1996 05:51:06 PST." <199612021351.AA17633 at zephyr dot isi dot edu>
  • Sender:
    • > 	Does this call into question the idea that there is a
      > 	single "default-free" view of the Internet?
      Of course. Contents of a default free routing table will
      depend on the filters on between you and who is originating
      the routes (incl. broken filters givin leaks of more
      specifics, deliberate filters cf Sprint on prefix
      length or those who build from the RA) and on any
      proxy aggregation that might happen on the way. As the
      original conjecture was that many routes "didn't
      need to be there" its hardly surprising that quite
      a lot of routes are carried by neither AGIS, Sprint
      or UUnet and things still carry on working (in general).
      > 	My box is attempting to collect a view of the routing
      > 	system as seen at a particular point in the topology.
      > 	While this may not be interesting to Randy, others
      > 	might find it useful.
      > 	I would be interested in tracking the views as seen at
      > 	a number of different places in the topology. The deltas
      > 	between the growth in the number of widely dispersed routes
      > 	vs the local varience would be an interesting number to 
      > 	track.
      There is a collector router at the LINX IXP in London UK which
      3 of us give transit to and everyone else there gives peer
      style routes to. You might ask Keith Mitchell (keith at linx dot net)
      if you can have an EBGP multihop from that for collection
      Alex Bligh
      Xara Networks