[routing-wg] IPv6 Routing Recommendations

Nick Hilliard wrote:

[...]
> 
> Which brings us back to vapour: we need to make a decision on this, because
> deaggregation levels will have a dramatic effect on the future requirement
> for large quantities of TCAM and related lookup.  Unfortunately, we have no
> basis on which to make this decision other than opinions and gut feeling.
> If we rely on the latter, then a highly conservative approach would be well
> advised.

I think that the magic number which will get consensus, eventually (I hope)
is important, but

> Nick

the really crucial issue, imho, is to also invent and install a magic stick
which motivates people to respect the recommendations in reality.

A brief peek into the most recent CIDR report for IPv4 on my disk gives me
a certain "gut feeling" about what will happen without such a mechanism -
(randomly picking out some "worst" offenders):

 --- 23Apr10 ---
ASnum    NetsNow NetsAggr  NetGain   % Gain   Description
AS6389      4001      301     3700    92.5%   BELLSOUTH-NET-BLK
AS22773     1141       76     1065    93.3%   ASN-CXA-ALL-CCI-22773-RDC
AS18566     1059       33     1026    96.9%   COVAD - Covad Communications
AS22047      549       50      499    90.9%   VTR BANDA ANCHA S.A.

So - a ratio of roughly 1:10 to be expected, from the most "liberal" or
most "creative" parties doing de-aggregation?

Wilfried