On Thu, Jan 14, 2010 at 10:54 AM, Noel Chiappa <[email protected]> wrote: > Ah, no. > > Everyone who keeps going on about embedding geographic information into the > names used by the path-selection is missing something really critical: > > ***Two computers which are _across the street from each other_, in geographic > terms, may be (and often, are) _many hops apart_, in network terms - because > they are connected to different ISPs whose geographically nearest point of > connection is a long way away (e.g. in another city).*** > > Geographic information about two computers tells you _nothing_ about how close > they are to each other, in terms of the path through the network between them. > That is why the names used in path selection have to be based on, and embody, > only the _actual network connectivity_. > > Now, can we stop being hearing this ridiculous nonsense about embedding > geographic information in the names used by path-selection?
+1 - folks REALLY need to see the guts of how an ISP network is built... and interconnected with the rest of humanity. _______________________________________________ rrg mailing list [email protected] http://www.irtf.org/mailman/listinfo/rrg
