You may have missed noticing it... I had provided the reference and the numbers in my eralier email -- http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/sidr/current/msg03586.html
According to http://bgpupdates.potaroo.net/instability/bgpupd.html the current global BGP system produces __ Average Prefixes per BGP Update: 2.24 __ Average BGP Update Messages per second: 1.13 Average Prefix Updates per second: 2.53 >From this we can compute: Average Prefix Updates per day = 218696 So yes, I did consider the _prefix _ updates as is the case in BGPSEC (not updates with packing in it). Sriram ________________________________________ From: christopher.mor...@gmail.com [christopher.mor...@gmail.com] On Behalf Of Christopher Morrow [morrowc.li...@gmail.com] Sent: Friday, November 11, 2011 11:45 AM To: Danny McPherson Cc: Jakob Heitz; Sriram, Kotikalapudi; sidr wg list Subject: Re: [sidr] WGLC: draft-ietf-sidr-bgpsec-reqs On Fri, Nov 11, 2011 at 8:49 AM, Danny McPherson <da...@tcb.net> wrote: > > On Nov 11, 2011, at 8:19 AM, Christopher Morrow wrote: > > There's actually some research on this, I recall the number 'globally' > as 1.2 avg packing... but internally, that may be different, of > course. > > I'd be interested in a pointer to that Chris, if you could pass it along. I had thought randy referenced the thing I am remembering, I'll ask once I get to the meeting venue. I think he's also pointed to some study work on the effect of ingesting 1x prefix vs packed prefixes... > The only quantitative analysis I've seen of this is here: > <http://www.tcb.net/stuff/danny-ucla-pack.pdf> > It's 3 months of data from 6 monitors. The basic observation is that > around 30% to 40% updates are packed, and these packed updates > carry up to 80% of prefixes -- a density that seems to be fairly consistent > across both iBGP and eBGP monitors. neat. > -danny _______________________________________________ sidr mailing list sidr@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sidr
