[EMAIL PROTECTED] ("Patrick W. Gilmore") writes:
> Obviously the table contains kruft. But I know we could not shrink
> it to 109K prefixes without losing something from where I sit. Are
> you sure there's no additional path info?
before we could be sure that an aggregation proposal was nondestructive,
we'd have to model it from where a lot of people sit, not just patrick.
on the one hand this seems to be a useful endeavour. in addition to
measuring the total number of routes, we probably ought to measure the
number of non-TE-related routes, and focus our attention on those routes
and also the ratio ("global TE cost borne by the routing system.")
on the other hand i dispair of finding a set of observation posts and
metrics that will abstract TE out of the observed routes in a way that
wouldn't be seen as controversial or useless by most of the community.
--
ISC Training! October 16-20, 2006, in the San Francisco Bay Area,
covering topics from DNS to DHCP. Email [EMAIL PROTECTED]
--
Paul Vixie
