focus on continental level aggregation, as I don't believe that fine-grained geographic addressing buys you much at all.
Apparently the trick is to balance the geo aggregation with interests of profit conscious providers. One can think of a (very) granular geo aggregation where specific prefixes PA to providers currently active in a given geography. Whatever happens to a provider, aggregation does not change because prefixes assigned to a fixed geo area? Thanks, Peter --- On Tue, 7/22/08, Tony Li <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > From: Tony Li <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Subject: [RRG] RE: Abstraction action boundary & geo-aggregation router > behavior > To: "'Robin Whittle'" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, "'Routing Research Group'" > <[email protected]> > Date: Tuesday, July 22, 2008, 4:53 AM > Hi Robin, > > |If this was a maths class, I would be sure that this > Friday's test > |would include questions on "abstraction action > boundary" and > |"abstraction naming boundary"! > > > ;-) Indeed. Those are Noel-ism's as you've found > out, and they're > absolutely necessary to talk about aggregation in a > meaningful way. > > > |Perhaps you could give a more concrete example of how you > envisage > |routers behaving in a geographic address aggregation > setting - in > |particular by explaining what you mean by > "abstraction action > |boundary" and by giving some examples of the > geographical limits and > |addressing arrangements of a "geo-patch". > Diagrams would really > |help me. > > > Sure. Again, let me focus on continental level > aggregation, as I don't > believe that fine-grained geographic addressing buys you > much at all. > > Let me continue the previously suggested example where > Canada is assigned a > prefix. For the sake of discussion, let's suppose that > it's assigned a /8. > Now, let's say that we will use this prefix as the > abstraction and that the > naming boundary will be the political boundaries of Canada. > Any site within > that region is welcome to request a prefix (subject to the > usual rules) from > that block. > > We can now place the abstraction action boundary remotely. > Let's say it's > at the geographical edge of North America. Thus, longer > prefixes for this > block would extend throughout the continental USA and > Mexico. However, more > specifics wouldn't leave the continental shelf. > > The benefit here is that routing table space is preserved > outside of the > action boundary, while within the action boundary, traffic > engineering is > preserved. > > Note that unlike small scale geographic addressing, there > is no central > traffic exchange required. Folks are still permitted to > extend more > specifics outside of the naming boundary so that the entry > points can still > be carefully directed when at a distance from the > abstraction that makes > sense. > > Tony > > > -- > to unsubscribe send a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with > the > word 'unsubscribe' in a single line as the message > text body. > archive: <http://psg.com/lists/rrg/> & > ftp://psg.com/pub/lists/rrg -- to unsubscribe send a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the word 'unsubscribe' in a single line as the message text body. archive: <http://psg.com/lists/rrg/> & ftp://psg.com/pub/lists/rrg
