Is it just me, or does the level of aggregation within 207/8 really suck?
--
Eric Kozowski Structured Network Systems, Inc.
kozowski@structured.net Better, Cheaper, Faster -- pick any two.
(503)656-3235 FAX "Providing High Quality, Reliable Internet Service"
(800)881-0962 Voice 56k to DS1
We see 616 routes in 207/8.
Our route aggregation suggestion tool suggests 281 aggregation possibilities
(which is not 281 routes potentially saved, but 281 routes that could be
aggregated).
It's clear from hand-inspection that some of the routes are being announced
more specifically for multi-homed customers, but I'm sure that a lot of those
routes could be aggregated or are covered by an already-announced more general
route.
Right now, it sorts routes and aggregation suggestions by provider and not
by IP address, but you can look at:
Some technical & political sisclaimers are on that page 
One key disclaimer is that it is now sorting by next-hop at MAE-East instead
of by AS-PATH, but we see a 1:1 correlation in our data between next-AS and
next-hop.
The other key one is that it's a tool that produces interesting output now,
but is NOT designed/tested for generating configs from.
207.6/16
207.10/16
207.12/14
207.16/16
207.23/16
207.43/16
207.70.64/18
Appear to be some of the most-in-need-of-aggregation areas.
One interesting thing that appears to be the case is that some owners
(nic-wise) of <= /16s appear to not have a matching catch-all route
and corresponding aggregation installed/announced.
Avi