in each office connected with a Frame Relay link to its corporate headquarters. Without supernetting, the routing table on any given router might have to account for 150 routers in each of the 50 districts, or 7500 different networks. However, if a hierarchical addressing system is implemented with supernetting, then each district has a centralized site as an interconnection point. Each route is summarized before being advertised to other districts. Each router now only recognizes its own subnet and the other 49 summarized routes. The determination of the summary route on a router involves the recognition of the number of highest-order bits that match all addresses. The summary route is calculated as follows. A router has the following networks in its routing table: 192.168.98.0 192.168.99.0 192.168.100.0 192.168.101.0 192.168.102.0 192.168.105.0 Firstly, the addresses are converted to binary format and aligned in a list: Secondly, the bits at which the common pattern of digits ends are located. These common bits are shown in red. Lastly, the number of common bits is counted. The summary route is found by setting the remaining bits to zero, as shown below. It is followed by a slash and then the number of common bits. The summarized route is 192.168.96.0/20. The subnet mask is 255.255.240.0. This summarized route also contains networks that were not in the summarized group, namely, 192.168.96.0, 192.168.97.0, 192.168.103.0, 192.168.104.0, 192.168.106.0, 192.168.107.0, 192.168.108.0, 192.168.109.0, 192.168.110.0, and 192.168.111.0. It must be assured that the missing networks do not exist outside of this route. In another example, an ISP is assigned a block of IP addresses by a regional Internet registry (RIR) of 172.1.0.0 to 172.1.255.255. The ISP might then assign subnetworks to each of their downstream clients, e.g., Customer A will have the range 172.1.1.0 to 172.1.1.255, Customer B would receive the range 172.1.2.0 to 172.1.2.255 and Customer C would receive the range 172.1.3.0 to 172.1.3.255, and so on. Instead of an entry for each of the subnets 172.1.1.x and 172.1.2.x, etc., the ISP could aggregate the entire 172.1.x.x address range and advertise the network 172.1.0.0/16, which would reduce the number of entries in the global routing table. Risks The following supernetting risks have been identified: Supernetting is implemented in different ways on different routers Supernetting on one router interface can influence how routes are advertised on other interfaces of the same router In the presence of supernetting, detecting a persistent routing loop becomes a