In einer eMail vom 10.07.2008 22:21:51 Westeuropäische Normalzeit schreibt [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
> On Thu, Jul 10, 2008 at 9:04 AM, <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> But geographical labelling does, and, it does NOT need any distribution >> mechanism. > > Heiner, > > As I'm pretty sure most everyone else on the list has figured out, > routing based on geographic aggregation results in routing policy > violations in any sufficiently complex internetwork. Oh, it'll work just fine if you deploy a municipally-funded, neutral and zero-fee IXP in every population centre. Admittedly, that changes the entire economic structure of the network... Brian Thank you. But this is not what I have in mind. Because it would be too much to acquire the topological view of the net of all ISPs' OSPF-networks, this view must be reduced, such that each current router is surrounded by strict links in the near neighborhood and by loose and looser links the more remote they are. Geographical information will hereby be helpful, but the nodes and links of the resultingly viewed topology could be bestowed with whichever attributes wrt QoS/SLA. Brian, correct me if I am wrong: DiffServ'axiom: I (the current router) do not see the network outside. I try to do my contribution for differentiated forwarding service based on my router-local experiences.Right? Whereas, with topology aggregation, the router can see the entire ISPs-network and base on it the own contributions. It will see many paths to the destination. It will precisely see that network part which would forward packets via it. There is much more and much better TE possible. The router could do better things than wasting the time with unnecessary UPDATE churn. Heiner
