On Fri, 08 Mar 1996 09:48:47 +0000  neil@domino.org wrote:
> On Thu, 7 Mar 1996 22:20:36 -0500 (EST) 
>  "Alec H. Peterson" <chuckie@panix.com> wrote:
> 
> > As far as cisco's not being able to handle the updates, I think it has
> > been displayed that they can handle that kind of load quite well.
> > Granted re-calculating routes does take a good chunk out of a CPU,
> > most of the backbone routers nowadays can handle it without much
> > trouble.
> 
> So why is it that esteemed people such as Sean Doran are pleading with people
> to use CIDR blocks and to redude the number of advertised routes that
> are announced to the rest of the world? I'll tell you. The routers on the
> bigger backbones melt down under a high amount of updates, I've seen Sprint,
> and BTNet fall over totally because of routeing table updates.

I agree with Alec, I don't think it's an CPU issue.  Memory, now
that's a bird of a different color.  I was under the impression CIDR was
to help ip-space exhaustion and memory consumption on the routes
(them route tables gettin' big boss!)...