Route table growth and hardware to the filter

From: on behalf of Jared Mauch
Sent: Sat 9/8/2007 8:17 AM
To: William Allen Simpson
Subject: Re: Route table growth and hardware to the filter

        I think this is the most important point so far. There are a lot
of providers that think that their announcements need to be global
to manage link/load balancing with their peers/upstreams. Proper use
of no-export (or similar) on the more specifics and the aggregate
being sent out will reduce the global noise significantly.

        Perhaps some of the providers to these networks will nudge them
a bit more to use proper techniques.

Could a partial solution to this problem be something as simple as the
routing vendors implementing something that by default analyzes the
routes that you're announcing to your neighbors and automatically flags
the more specifics that are covered by an identical larger aggregate with
no-export? Rather than relying on the announcing network to make an
effort to use no-export, make it a default that can be turned off if the
need arises.

If the cause of alot of this garbage is indeed caused by cluelessness or
apathy, it seems like this would help. If people are too lazy or lacking
the knowledge to fix what they're announcing, they're likely too lazy or
lacking the knowledge to disable a default setting that flags extra
unnecessary routes with no-export.