Routing Health Score Calculator
Score routing health from convergence, table utilisation, flap rate, session state and path redundancy.
Inputs
Routing Health Score
81.3/100
Rating
B — Good
Convergence Score
80.0
Route Stability Score
60.0
Session Health Score
90.0
Weakest Dimension
Route stability (flapping) at 60/100
Step by step
Values used
Measured convergence time = 1,200 ms; Convergence target = 1,000 ms; Route table utilisation = 62 %; Route flaps per hour = 8 flaps; Routing sessions down = 1 sessions; Total routing sessions = 40 sessions; Prefixes with a backup path = 85 %
Routing Health Score
Score = 25% convergence + 20% stability + 20% session health + 20% path redundancy + 15% table headroom, each dimension normalised to 0–100.
Capacity scoring
Table headroom score = 100 − 2.5 × (utilisation − 60), so it only penalises above 60%.
Routing Health Score
= 81.3 /100
Rating
= B — Good
Convergence Score
= 80.0
Route Stability Score
= 60.0
Session Health Score
= 90.0
Weakest Dimension
= Route stability (flapping) at 60/100
How it works
Each dimension is scaled so that a healthy network scores near 100, then combined with weights that reflect what actually causes outages — convergence and stability carry the most, table headroom the least because it degrades gradually rather than suddenly. A single trend line is what gets routing health onto a management dashboard, and surfacing the weakest dimension keeps the score actionable instead of decorative.
Formulas
Routing Health Score
Score = 25% convergence + 20% stability + 20% session health + 20% path redundancy + 15% table headroom, each dimension normalised to 0–100.
- convergence
- 100 minus the percentage by which measured convergence overshoots the target
- stability
- 100 minus 5 points per route flap per hour
- session health
- 100 minus 4 points per percent of routing sessions down
Capacity scoring
Table headroom score = 100 − 2.5 × (utilisation − 60), so it only penalises above 60%.
Frequently Asked Questions
How is Routing Health Score calculated?
Score = 25% convergence + 20% stability + 20% session health + 20% path redundancy + 15% table headroom, each dimension normalised to 0–100. Each dimension is scaled so that a healthy network scores near 100, then combined with weights that reflect what actually causes outages — convergence and stability carry the most, table headroom the least because it degrades gradually rather than suddenly.
Why does Routing Health Score matter?
A single trend line is what gets routing health onto a management dashboard, and surfacing the weakest dimension keeps the score actionable instead of decorative.
What values do I need to enter?
This calculator takes 7 inputs: Measured convergence time, Convergence target, Route table utilisation, Route flaps per hour, Routing sessions down, Total routing sessions, Prefixes with a backup path. The pre-filled defaults are a realistic starting point — replace them with figures from your own environment for a result you can act on.
Is the weighting authoritative?
No — it is a defensible default, not a standard. Reweight it for your environment: raise path redundancy if you carry real-time media, raise table headroom if you are close to a FIB limit, and keep the weights fixed afterwards so the trend stays comparable.