>>> you mean your vendor won't give you the knobs to do it smartly ([j]tac >>> tickets open for five years)? wonder why. >> >> Might be useful if you mentioned what you considered a "smart" way to >> trim the fib. But then you couldn't bitch and moan about people not >> understanding you, which is the real reason you post to NANOG.
i did not get the original of this post, but the ad hominem speaks for it pathetic self. > Optimization #1 -- elimination of more specifics where there's a less > specific that has the same next hop (obviously only in cases where the > less specific is the one that would be used if the more specific were > left out). > > Example: if 10.10.4.0/22 has the same next hop as 10.10.7.0/24, the > latter can be left out of TCAM (assuming there's not a 10.10.6.0/23 > with a different next hop). > > Optimization #2 -- concatenation of adjacent routes when they have the > same next hop > > Example: If 10.10.12.0/15 and 10.10.14.0/15 have the same next hop, > leave them both out of TCAM and install 10.10.14.0/14 > > Optimization #3 -- elimination of routes that have more specifics for > their entire range. > > Example: Don't program 10.10.4.0/22 in TCAM is 10.10.4.0/23, > 10.10.6.0/24 an 10.10.7.0/24 all exist those are some of the cases. i guess i should dig up the old [j]tac tickets. randy
