In einer eMail vom 29.05.2010 16:50:38 Westeuropäische Sommerzeit schreibt [email protected]:
На Saturday 29 May 2010 в 14:03:49 [email protected] изпрати: > Let me get to the real point. My concept is the same as of Google-map. Each > router shall acqire a view of the internet nodes and internet links > according to different zooms. These differently skimmed topologies shall be > combined to a single flat topology, whereby each router sees itself (and all > the other routers of the same geopatch) as if this were the center-geopatch > of the world. Surrounded by larger and larger geopatches and their > respectively skimmed topologies. In spite of equal degree skimming, links to far > remote neighbor nodes must be contained. To disseminate all the required > information takes a relatively minor enhancement of the BGP UPDATE message. > Introducing policy routing is of course another and important step. But it must > be the SECOND step. Links and nodes may be assigned values&attributes for > computing alternative routes. People are welcome to contribute. Computing > Non-best-effort intra-domain routes is well-known for more than a decade, > why shouldn't it be possible to develop inter-domain QoS/Policy routes ?! > > Without collecting any single path while enabling twice as many path as are > by DV! Without doing any single IP-prefix! > Even better-than-of-today-Policy routing would be enabled (e.g. time of day > routing) > > etc.etc. > > Heiner So there are nodes, links, geopatches (?) with topologies. Also distinct inter-domain and intra-domain routes? There is the possibility to compute routes based on the visible well-skimmed topology, but there is no route collection process. The computed routes would contain strict and loose (intra-and inter-domain) links with the first link being a strict one. Are there any names/IDs? TARA-Locator = { square-degree# (Range 1 to 64800) square-minute #(Range 1 to 3600 ) Longitude-second (Range 1 to 60 ) Latitude -second (Range 1 to 60 )}.It shall be unique wrt each TARA-router. 5 Octets for let's say 10 000 DFZ routers. If there were still clashes,somenegotiation protocol would help.Obviously there is no need for any assignment authority either. Can you give a URL, please? I have no problems with submitting to the IRTF, but I do not want to offer it like sour beer. I am afraid all other more mainstream solutions have preference. Heiner Toni _______________________________________________ rrg mailing list [email protected] http://www.irtf.org/mailman/listinfo/rrg
_______________________________________________ rrg mailing list [email protected] http://www.irtf.org/mailman/listinfo/rrg
