Some comment and proposals to improve the strategy C text which currently is: Strategy C. Suppress distant routes by aggregating them into sets expected to be available in a given direction. Because LOC reachability info is not flooded, the routing tables each router must deal with are relatively small. Variants include: C1. Geographic aggregation. All nodes within some geographic boundary are assigned the same LOC. Routers move packets to any adjacent router deemed to be "closer" to the LOC in question. Major criticisms: No one has been able to construct a protocol under strategy C without introducing constraints that are fundamentally incompatible with the Internet's economic model. For example, Geoag has been shown to have uncorrectable theft-of-service anomalies in networks as small as 8 autonomous systems and two geographic areas. --------------------------proposed text: --------------------------------------------------------- Strategy C: Extend BGP such that routers can acquire the view of a well-sparsed internet topology with strict links in the near surrounding and - in general - with loose and looser links the more remote they are (strict links to very remote nodes may still be part of this topology). Determine the next best hop based on that viewed destination node which is either the true destination node or a node which is closest to the true but not yet visible destination node. Arrange the results such that a best next hop can be retrieved either by 1 or by 3 table lookups. Of course, incremental deployment has to be supported.The goal is to shrink the routing table continuously so that it becomes empty as soon as all DFZ routers will comply. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ -------------------- Major criticisms: I do not know who is Geoag, so I cannot give an explanation why Geoag failed. Heiner
_______________________________________________ rrg mailing list [email protected] https://www.irtf.org/mailman/listinfo/rrg
