From owner-ptomaine@shrubbery.net Wed Aug 8 13:59:35 2001 Received: from guelah.shrubbery.net (guelah.shrubbery.net [198.58.5.1]) by ni.shrubbery.net (8.11.3/8.11.1) with ESMTP id f78DxZN05378 for ; Wed, 8 Aug 2001 13:59:35 GMT Received: by guelah.shrubbery.net (8.11.4/8.11.1) id f78DvWE27841 for ptomaine-outgoing; Wed, 8 Aug 2001 13:57:32 GMT Received: from xoanon.mcwest.org (xoanon.Colorado.EDU [198.11.17.3]) by guelah.shrubbery.net (8.11.4/8.11.1) with ESMTP id f78DvLP27836 for ; Wed, 8 Aug 2001 13:57:21 GMT Received: from xoanon.mcwest.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by xoanon.mcwest.org (8.11.1/8.11.1) with ESMTP id f78DuLJ13257; Wed, 8 Aug 2001 07:56:21 -0600 (MDT) (envelope-from mccreary@xoanon.mcwest.org) Message-Id: <200108081356.f78DuLJ13257@xoanon.mcwest.org> To: abha ahuja cc: ptomaine@shrubbery.net From: mccreary@pch.net Subject: Re: possible charter In-reply-to: Your message of "Tue, 24 Jul 2001 14:35:58 EDT." Date: Wed, 08 Aug 2001 07:56:21 -0600 Sender: owner-ptomaine@shrubbery.net Precedence: bulk I have a couple additional references for the charter. The first is Dave Meyer's information page for the Route Views project at http://www.antc.uoregon.edu/route-views/, and his archive of BGP table snapshots at http://128.223.162.74/oix-route-views/. The second is PCH's routing table size graph at http://www.pch.net/routing/BGP_table_size.html, and the MOAT and PCH data archives at http://moat.nlanr.net/AS and http://www.pch.net/documents/data/routing-tables/route-views.oregon-ix.net/. The MOAT data extends back to November of 1997, so it is a good source for investigating longer-term trends. The MOAT data is also mirrored on the PCH web server at http://www.pch.net/documents/data/routing-tables/route-views.oregon-ix.net/moat/ -- Sean McCreary mccreary@pch.net From owner-ptomaine@shrubbery.net Wed Aug 8 15:58:01 2001 Received: from guelah.shrubbery.net (guelah.shrubbery.net [198.58.5.1]) by ni.shrubbery.net (8.11.3/8.11.1) with ESMTP id f78Fw1N05447 for ; Wed, 8 Aug 2001 15:58:01 GMT Received: by guelah.shrubbery.net (8.11.4/8.11.1) id f78Fujh01257 for ptomaine-outgoing; Wed, 8 Aug 2001 15:56:45 GMT Received: from donkeykong.gpcc.itd.umich.edu (smtp@donkeykong.gpcc.itd.umich.edu [141.211.2.163]) by guelah.shrubbery.net (8.11.4/8.11.1) with ESMTP id f78FuhP01253 for ; Wed, 8 Aug 2001 15:56:43 GMT Received: from pacman.gpcc.itd.umich.edu (smtp@pacman.gpcc.itd.umich.edu [141.211.2.150]) by donkeykong.gpcc.itd.umich.edu (8.8.8/4.3-mailhub) with ESMTP id LAA02759 for ; Wed, 8 Aug 2001 11:56:42 -0400 (EDT) Received: from localhost (ahuja@localhost) by pacman.gpcc.itd.umich.edu (8.8.8/5.1-client) with ESMTP id LAA10323 for ; Wed, 8 Aug 2001 11:56:41 -0400 (EDT) Date: Wed, 8 Aug 2001 11:56:41 -0400 (EDT) From: abha ahuja X-X-Sender: To: Subject: Revised Agenda Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-ptomaine@shrubbery.net Precedence: bulk Revised Agenda for tomorrow's meeting.... -Intro and Agenda Bashing (5 min) -Analysis of RIPE RIS BGP Data - Cengiz Alaettinoglu (30 min) -Measuring Routing Table Growth - Randy Bush (20 min) -draft-berkowitz-tblgrow-00.txt (15 mins) - Howard C. Berkowitz -NOPEER scope (15 min) - Geoff Huston -Review of potential charter (15 min) =abha ;) ++++++++++++++++++ abha ahuja From owner-ptomaine@shrubbery.net Thu Aug 9 12:53:45 2001 Received: from guelah.shrubbery.net (guelah.shrubbery.net [198.58.5.1]) by ni.shrubbery.net (8.11.3/8.11.1) with ESMTP id f79CrjN06897 for ; Thu, 9 Aug 2001 12:53:45 GMT Received: by guelah.shrubbery.net (8.11.4/8.11.1) id f79CrEp08147 for ptomaine-outgoing; Thu, 9 Aug 2001 12:53:14 GMT Received: from roam.psg.com (root@host217-33-136-119.ietf.ignite.net [217.33.136.119]) by guelah.shrubbery.net (8.11.4/8.11.1) with ESMTP id f79CrAP08142 for ; Thu, 9 Aug 2001 12:53:10 GMT Received: from randy by roam.psg.com with local (Exim 3.30 #1) id 15UpJE-000228-00 for ptomaine@shrubbery.net; Thu, 09 Aug 2001 13:53:08 +0100 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From: Randy Bush To: ptomaine@shrubbery.net Subject: foils and paper Message-Id: Date: Thu, 09 Aug 2001 13:53:08 +0100 Sender: owner-ptomaine@shrubbery.net Precedence: bulk the book : http://www.research.att.com/~jrex/papers/filter.(pdf|ps) the movie : http://psg.com/~randy/010809.ptomaine.pdf randy From owner-ptomaine@shrubbery.net Thu Aug 9 15:49:15 2001 Received: from guelah.shrubbery.net (guelah.shrubbery.net [198.58.5.1]) by ni.shrubbery.net (8.11.3/8.11.1) with ESMTP id f79FnFN07020 for ; Thu, 9 Aug 2001 15:49:15 GMT Received: by guelah.shrubbery.net (8.11.4/8.11.1) id f79Fmbi13373 for ptomaine-outgoing; Thu, 9 Aug 2001 15:48:38 GMT Received: from elf.packetdesign.com (host217-33-137-168.ietf.ignite.net [217.33.137.168]) by guelah.shrubbery.net (8.11.4/8.11.1) with ESMTP id f79FmYP13368 for ; Thu, 9 Aug 2001 15:48:34 GMT Received: (from cengiz@localhost) by elf.packetdesign.com (8.11.2/8.11.2) id f79Fmoj15237; Thu, 9 Aug 2001 08:48:50 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: elf.packetdesign.com: cengiz set sender to cengiz@packetdesign.com using -f Subject: more foils From: Cengiz Alaettinoglu To: Randy Bush Cc: ptomaine@shrubbery.net In-Reply-To: References: Content-Type: text/plain Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mailer: Evolution/0.12.99 (Preview Release) Date: 09 Aug 2001 08:48:50 -0700 Message-Id: <997372130.14608.46.camel@elf.packetdesign.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Sender: owner-ptomaine@shrubbery.net Precedence: bulk My slides will be available at http://www.packetdesign.com/publications.html probably sometime next week. Cengiz On 09 Aug 2001 13:53:08 +0100, Randy Bush wrote: > the book : http://www.research.att.com/~jrex/papers/filter.(pdf|ps) > the movie : http://psg.com/~randy/010809.ptomaine.pdf > > randy > From owner-ptomaine@shrubbery.net Sun Aug 12 01:51:55 2001 Received: from guelah.shrubbery.net (guelah.shrubbery.net [198.58.5.1]) by ni.shrubbery.net (8.11.3/8.11.1) with ESMTP id f7C1ptN10654 for ; Sun, 12 Aug 2001 01:51:55 GMT Received: by guelah.shrubbery.net (8.11.4/8.11.1) id f7C1nhO10291 for ptomaine-outgoing; Sun, 12 Aug 2001 01:49:43 GMT Received: from kahuna.telstra.net (kahuna.telstra.net [139.130.204.11]) by guelah.shrubbery.net (8.11.4/8.11.1) with ESMTP id f7C1ndP10287 for ; Sun, 12 Aug 2001 01:49:40 GMT Received: from tecra.telstra.net (jumble.telstra.net [139.130.204.15]) by kahuna.telstra.net (8.11.3/8.11.3) with ESMTP id f7C1nU818302 for ; Sun, 12 Aug 2001 11:49:32 +1000 (EST) (envelope-from gih@telstra.net) Message-Id: <4.3.2.7.2.20010812114412.00b78630@localhost> X-Sender: gih@localhost X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 4.3.2 Date: Sun, 12 Aug 2001 11:48:31 +1000 To: ptomaine@shrubbery.net From: Geoff Huston Subject: NOPEER community proposal fromthe PTOMAINE BOF In-Reply-To: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed Sender: owner-ptomaine@shrubbery.net Precedence: bulk The presentation: www.telstra.net/gih/nopeer.pdf The text: www.telstra.net/gih/nopeer.txt The text has been submitted as draft-huston-nopeer-00.txt to the drafts editor as an interim step. I understand that the BOF hummed in accordance with the proposal that if PTOMAINE is chartered as a Working Group, then the WG would take on this document as a WG document. thanks, Geoff From owner-ptomaine@shrubbery.net Mon Aug 13 18:14:40 2001 Received: from guelah.shrubbery.net (guelah.shrubbery.net [198.58.5.1]) by ni.shrubbery.net (8.11.3/8.11.1) with ESMTP id f7DIEeN13240 for ; Mon, 13 Aug 2001 18:14:40 GMT Received: from localhost (localhost [[UNIX: localhost]]) by guelah.shrubbery.net (8.11.4/8.11.1) id f7DIDOZ21260 for ptomaine-outgoing; Mon, 13 Aug 2001 18:13:24 GMT Received: from berzerk.gpcc.itd.umich.edu (smtp@berzerk.gpcc.itd.umich.edu [141.211.2.162]) by guelah.shrubbery.net (8.11.4/8.11.1) with ESMTP id f7DIDKP21255 for ; Mon, 13 Aug 2001 18:13:21 GMT Received: from frogger.gpcc.itd.umich.edu (smtp@frogger.gpcc.itd.umich.edu [141.211.2.144]) by berzerk.gpcc.itd.umich.edu (8.8.8/4.3-mailhub) with ESMTP id OAA27662; Mon, 13 Aug 2001 14:13:17 -0400 (EDT) Received: from localhost (ahuja@localhost) by frogger.gpcc.itd.umich.edu (8.8.8/5.1-client) with ESMTP id OAA13222; Mon, 13 Aug 2001 14:13:16 -0400 (EDT) Date: Mon, 13 Aug 2001 14:13:16 -0400 (EDT) From: abha ahuja X-X-Sender: To: cc: "Wijnen, Bert (Bert)" , Randy Bush Subject: Latest Version Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-ptomaine@shrubbery.net Precedence: bulk Here is the most recent version of the charter. This is what we'll be sending to the IESG for WG approval unless someone has any major objections... -abha ;) =========================================================================== Prefix Taxonomy Ongoing Measurement & Inter Network Experiment (ptomaine) Chair(s): Abha Ahuja Operations Area Director(s): Randy Bush Bert Wijnen Operations and Management Area Advisor: Randy Bush Mailing Lists: General Discussion: ptomaine@shrubbery.net To Subscribe: majordomo@shrubbery.net In Body: subscribe ptomaine Archive: http://www.shrubbery.net/ptomaine DESCRIPTION: Routing table growth has been an issue of much concern. Many have talked about temporary methods to alleviate the drain on Internet resources. In the vein of these discussions, we started to consider aggregation and filtering techniques to reduce the amount of routing information carried by routers with global knowledge. The purpose of the Prefix Taxonomy Ongoing Measurement & Inter Network Experiment WG is to consider and measure the problem of routing table growth and possible interim methods for reducing the impact of routing table resource consumption within a network and the global Internet. The first step of the WG is to define the impacts on routing resource consumption and to identify the problems facing routing scalability. We believe the next step is to develop suggestions for filtering and aggregating prefixes to reduce an individual networks routing table size and route processing load and possible knobs with the least loss of reachability if such methods are determined to be feasible in addressing the problem. This work may possibly define a framework for larger efforts to address the problems facing interdomain routing scalability. GOALS: 1) To provide a clear definition of the problems facing Internet Routing Scaling today. This includes routing table size and route processing load. 2) To provide a taxonomy to describe prefix information for peer review. 3) To collate measurements of routing table scaling data and publish a reference list. 4) To discuss and document methods of filtering/aggregating prefix information and to discuss and document what support from protocols or vendor knobs that might be helpful in doing this. In addition, to suggest policy guidelines to RIRs, LIRs and/or ISPs for allocations,etc. that may be useful. 5) To determine the long and short term effects of filtering/aggregating prefixes to reduce router resource consumption. 6) To develop methods of controlling policy information propagation in order to limit the need for propagation of prefix sub-aggregates. MILESTONES: Nov 01 - Submit Taxonomy Draft Dec 01 - Submit Problem Statement Draft Jan 02 - Submit References Draft Feb 02 - Submit Policy Propagation Draft Some Relevant References: http://www.antc.uoregon.edu/route-views/ http://www.pch.net/routing/BGP_table_size.html http://moat.nlanr.net/AS http://www.pch.net/documents/data/routing-tables/route-views.oregon-ix.net/ http://www.employees.org/~tbates/cidr-report.html http://www.telstra.net/ops/bgp/index.html http://www.apnic.net/stats/bgp http://www.merit.edu/ipma From owner-ptomaine@shrubbery.net Mon Aug 13 18:34:46 2001 Received: from guelah.shrubbery.net (guelah.shrubbery.net [198.58.5.1]) by ni.shrubbery.net (8.11.3/8.11.1) with ESMTP id f7DIYkN13253 for ; Mon, 13 Aug 2001 18:34:46 GMT Received: by guelah.shrubbery.net (8.11.4/8.11.1) id f7DIXr022215 for ptomaine-outgoing; Mon, 13 Aug 2001 18:33:54 GMT Received: from ginger.lcs.mit.edu (ginger.lcs.mit.edu [18.26.0.82]) by guelah.shrubbery.net (8.11.4/8.11.1) with ESMTP id f7DIXnP22211 for ; Mon, 13 Aug 2001 18:33:49 GMT Received: (from jnc@localhost) by ginger.lcs.mit.edu (8.9.1/8.9.1) id OAA15321; Mon, 13 Aug 2001 14:33:42 -0400 Date: Mon, 13 Aug 2001 14:33:42 -0400 From: "J. Noel Chiappa" Message-Id: <200108131833.OAA15321@ginger.lcs.mit.edu> To: ahuja@umich.edu, ptomaine@shrubbery.net Subject: Re: Latest Version Cc: bwijnen@lucent.com, jnc@ginger.lcs.mit.edu, randy@psg.com Sender: owner-ptomaine@shrubbery.net Precedence: bulk > From: abha ahuja > Here is the most recent version of the charter. > to consider and measure the problem of routing table growth and > possible interim methods for reducing the impact of routing table > resource consumption ... The first step of the WG is to define the > impacts on routing resource consumption In the long run, the problem with large tables is not resource consumption so much as increased stabilization time (with respect to any particular destination, of course - the table as a whole is changing all the time in a network this big). Bandwidth is already not a problem, and CPU power and memory is getting cheaper all the time, which might lead some people "out there" to think that we can grow our way out of the problem with faster/bigger hardware. "Time" is not traditionally thought of as a resource... :-) > 4) To discuss and document methods of filtering/aggregating prefix > information and to discuss and document what support from protocols or > vendor knobs that might be helpful in doing this. > In addition, to suggest policy guidelines to RIRs, LIRs and/or ISPs for > allocations, etc. that may be useful. I would have said "allocations and aggregations", since it's the latter that is the only solution. (And it might be worth discussing that, and getting general agreement to that point, and making a point of stating that better aggregation is the *only* technique known for making routing scale.) Noel From owner-ptomaine@shrubbery.net Mon Aug 13 18:36:19 2001 Received: from guelah.shrubbery.net (guelah.shrubbery.net [198.58.5.1]) by ni.shrubbery.net (8.11.3/8.11.1) with ESMTP id f7DIaJN13259 for ; Mon, 13 Aug 2001 18:36:19 GMT Received: by guelah.shrubbery.net (8.11.4/8.11.1) id f7DIaC522329 for ptomaine-outgoing; Mon, 13 Aug 2001 18:36:12 GMT Received: from rip.psg.com (exim@rip.psg.com [147.28.0.39]) by guelah.shrubbery.net (8.11.4/8.11.1) with ESMTP id f7DIa9P22325 for ; Mon, 13 Aug 2001 18:36:10 GMT Received: from randy by rip.psg.com with local (Exim 3.31 #1) id 15WMZK-000B81-00; Mon, 13 Aug 2001 11:36:06 -0700 From: Randy Bush MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: "J. Noel Chiappa" Cc: ptomaine@shrubbery.net, bwijnen@lucent.com Subject: Re: Latest Version References: <200108131833.OAA15321@ginger.lcs.mit.edu> Message-Id: Date: Mon, 13 Aug 2001 11:36:06 -0700 Sender: owner-ptomaine@shrubbery.net Precedence: bulk > making a point of stating that better aggregation is the *only* technique > known for making routing scale. and do you see any path(s) for doing this in the *current* routing system, which is the range of the ptomaine effort? randy From owner-ptomaine@shrubbery.net Mon Aug 13 18:36:41 2001 Received: from guelah.shrubbery.net (guelah.shrubbery.net [198.58.5.1]) by ni.shrubbery.net (8.11.3/8.11.1) with ESMTP id f7DIafN13265 for ; Mon, 13 Aug 2001 18:36:41 GMT Received: by guelah.shrubbery.net (8.11.4/8.11.1) id f7DIadk22370 for ptomaine-outgoing; Mon, 13 Aug 2001 18:36:39 GMT Received: from berzerk.gpcc.itd.umich.edu (smtp@berzerk.gpcc.itd.umich.edu [141.211.2.162]) by guelah.shrubbery.net (8.11.4/8.11.1) with ESMTP id f7DIaXP22352 for ; Mon, 13 Aug 2001 18:36:34 GMT Received: from frogger.gpcc.itd.umich.edu (smtp@frogger.gpcc.itd.umich.edu [141.211.2.144]) by berzerk.gpcc.itd.umich.edu (8.8.8/4.3-mailhub) with ESMTP id OAA01216; Mon, 13 Aug 2001 14:36:30 -0400 (EDT) Received: from localhost (ahuja@localhost) by frogger.gpcc.itd.umich.edu (8.8.8/5.1-client) with ESMTP id OAA17157; Mon, 13 Aug 2001 14:36:29 -0400 (EDT) Date: Mon, 13 Aug 2001 14:36:29 -0400 (EDT) From: abha ahuja X-X-Sender: To: "J. Noel Chiappa" cc: , , Subject: Re: Latest Version In-Reply-To: <200108131833.OAA15321@ginger.lcs.mit.edu> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-ptomaine@shrubbery.net Precedence: bulk Hi Noel! > > to consider and measure the problem of routing table growth and > > possible interim methods for reducing the impact of routing table > > resource consumption ... The first step of the WG is to define the > > impacts on routing resource consumption > > In the long run, the problem with large tables is not resource consumption so > much as increased stabilization time (with respect to any particular > destination, of course - the table as a whole is changing all the time in a > network this big). Totally agree! Unfortunately, there seems to be a lot of misconception about what the problem really is, thus the first goal of this WG is to define it for all to see.... Filtering/better aggregation has the benefit that it reduces the scope of "detailed" info propagation to help improve the stabilization time of the system as a whole. > Bandwidth is already not a problem, and CPU power and memory is getting > cheaper all the time, which might lead some people "out there" to think that > we can grow our way out of the problem with faster/bigger hardware. "Time" is > not traditionally thought of as a resource... :-) :) > > > 4) To discuss and document methods of filtering/aggregating prefix > > information and to discuss and document what support from protocols or > > vendor knobs that might be helpful in doing this. > > In addition, to suggest policy guidelines to RIRs, LIRs and/or ISPs for > > allocations, etc. that may be useful. > > I would have said "allocations and aggregations", since it's the latter that > is the only solution. Will fix. > (And it might be worth discussing that, and getting general agreement to that > point, and making a point of stating that better aggregation is the *only* > technique known for making routing scale.) *grin* Thanks, Noel! -abha ;) From owner-ptomaine@shrubbery.net Wed Aug 15 12:45:29 2001 Received: from guelah.shrubbery.net (guelah.shrubbery.net [198.58.5.1]) by ni.shrubbery.net (8.11.3/8.11.1) with ESMTP id f7FCjTN15985 for ; Wed, 15 Aug 2001 12:45:29 GMT Received: from localhost (localhost [[UNIX: localhost]]) by guelah.shrubbery.net (8.11.4/8.11.1) id f7FChcw13663 for ptomaine-outgoing; Wed, 15 Aug 2001 12:43:38 GMT Received: from [192.168.100.19] (smtp.kpnqwest.com [193.242.92.8]) by guelah.shrubbery.net (8.11.4/8.11.1) with ESMTP id f7FChXP13657 for ; Wed, 15 Aug 2001 12:43:33 GMT Received: from ntexghub01.kpnqwest.com (unverified) by (Content Technologies SMTPRS 4.2.1) with ESMTP id ; Wed, 15 Aug 2001 14:43:16 +0200 Received: by ntexghub01 with Internet Mail Service (5.5.2653.19) id <3Y3ZJ6VN>; Wed, 15 Aug 2001 14:43:16 +0200 Message-ID: <1E810ACBCC29D51185DF00508B66CCEE04B6DC@ntexghfd02> From: "Metz, Eduard" To: "'abha ahuja'" , ptomaine@shrubbery.net Cc: "Wijnen, Bert (Bert)" , Randy Bush Subject: RE: Latest Version Date: Wed, 15 Aug 2001 14:43:13 +0200 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2653.19) Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Sender: owner-ptomaine@shrubbery.net Precedence: bulk I agree that the handling the "size" of things in terms of resources and convergence etc is becoming (or is) more and more a problem. Since size is a problem, reducing size could be a solution, or at least reduce the problem as such. Currently, the description seems very focussed on this. I wonder whether there should not be more room left open for different solutions, that e.g. handle "size" differently, or converge in another way, etc. Reducing size is a solution, but probably not the only one. Also given that routing tables keep growing, we may end up at the same or bigger size anyway ... (even when reducing them now). cheers, Eduard ps.1 How does this group relate to the "future domain routing" initiative on the routing-research list (if at all)? ps.2 Minor comment: First section, "Internet resources" should probably be something like "router resources". > > DESCRIPTION: > > Routing table growth has been an issue of much concern. Many > have talked > about temporary methods to alleviate the drain on Internet > resources. In the > vein of these discussions, we started to consider aggregation > and filtering > techniques to reduce the amount of routing information > carried by routers with > global knowledge. > > The purpose of the Prefix Taxonomy Ongoing Measurement & Inter Network > Experiment WG is to consider and measure the problem of routing table > growth and possible interim methods for reducing the impact of routing > table resource consumption within a network and the global > Internet. The > first step of the WG is to define the impacts on routing resource > consumption and to identify the problems facing routing scalability. > > We believe the next step is to develop suggestions for filtering and > aggregating prefixes to reduce an individual networks routing > table size > and route processing load and possible knobs with the least loss of > reachability if such methods are determined to be feasible in > addressing > the problem. This work may possibly define a framework for > larger efforts > to address the problems facing interdomain routing scalability. > > GOALS: > > 1) To provide a clear definition of the problems facing Internet > Routing Scaling today. This includes routing table size and route > processing load. > 2) To provide a taxonomy to describe prefix information for > peer review. > 3) To collate measurements of routing table scaling data and publish a > reference list. > 4) To discuss and document methods of filtering/aggregating prefix > information and to discuss and document what support from > protocols or > vendor knobs that might be helpful in doing this. In addition, to > suggest policy guidelines to RIRs, LIRs and/or ISPs for > allocations,etc. that may be useful. > 5) To determine the long and short term effects of > filtering/aggregating > prefixes to reduce router resource consumption. > 6) To develop methods of controlling policy information propagation in > order to limit the need for propagation of prefix sub-aggregates. > > MILESTONES: > > Nov 01 - Submit Taxonomy Draft > Dec 01 - Submit Problem Statement Draft > Jan 02 - Submit References Draft > Feb 02 - Submit Policy Propagation Draft > > Some Relevant References: > > http://www.antc.uoregon.edu/route-views/ > http://www.pch.net/routing/BGP_table_size.html > http://moat.nlanr.net/AS > http://www.pch.net/documents/data/routing-tables/route-views.o regon-ix.net/ http://www.employees.org/~tbates/cidr-report.html http://www.telstra.net/ops/bgp/index.html http://www.apnic.net/stats/bgp http://www.merit.edu/ipma From owner-ptomaine@shrubbery.net Fri Aug 17 18:37:40 2001 Received: from guelah.shrubbery.net (guelah.shrubbery.net [198.58.5.1]) by ni.shrubbery.net (8.11.3/8.11.1) with ESMTP id f7HIbeN19233 for ; Fri, 17 Aug 2001 18:37:40 GMT Received: by guelah.shrubbery.net (8.11.4/8.11.1) id f7HIZiH01402 for ptomaine-outgoing; Fri, 17 Aug 2001 18:35:44 GMT Received: from www.hammar.net (IDENT:gan@vg-204-91-22-221.vger.com [204.91.22.221]) by guelah.shrubbery.net (8.11.4/8.11.1) with ESMTP id f7HIZfP01398 for ; Fri, 17 Aug 2001 18:35:41 GMT Received: (from gan@localhost) by www.hammar.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) id OAA11496; Fri, 17 Aug 2001 14:16:24 -0400 (EDT) Date: Fri, 17 Aug 2001 14:16:23 -0400 From: Megan Hammar To: "Metz, Eduard" Cc: "'abha ahuja'" , ptomaine@shrubbery.net, "Wijnen, Bert (Bert)" , Randy Bush Subject: Re: Latest Version Message-ID: <20010817141623.B15198@hammar.net> Reply-To: gan@hammar.net References: <1E810ACBCC29D51185DF00508B66CCEE04B6DC@ntexghfd02> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Mailer: Mutt 1.0i In-Reply-To: <1E810ACBCC29D51185DF00508B66CCEE04B6DC@ntexghfd02>; from Eduard.Metz@kpnqwest.com on Wed, Aug 15, 2001 at 02:43:13PM +0200 Sender: owner-ptomaine@shrubbery.net Precedence: bulk > > I agree that the handling the "size" of things in terms of resources and > convergence etc is becoming (or is) more and more a problem. Since size is a > problem, reducing size could be a solution, or at least reduce the problem > as such. Currently, the description seems very focussed on this. I wonder > whether there should not be more room left open for different solutions, > that e.g. handle "size" differently, or converge in another way, etc. > Reducing size is a solution, but probably not the only one. Also given that > routing tables keep growing, we may end up at the same or bigger size anyway > ... (even when reducing them now). > cheers, > Eduard yes but the other options are more long term solutions which is not really the focus of ptomaine as I understand it. The idea is to get us as far as we can on what we have until the something better other groups are working on can be implemented...ie up to 5 years. -Megan