lf Of
Iljitsch van Beijnum
Sent: Tuesday, November 30, 2004 7:01 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Cc: 'NANOG list'
Subject: Re: Sensible geographical addressing [Was: 16 vs 32 bit ASNs yadda,
yadda]
On 30-nov-04, at 23:32, Scott Morris wrote:
> At large NAP points (the higher order ISP's) t
On 30-nov-04, at 23:32, Scott Morris wrote:
At large NAP points (the higher order ISP's) this may make some sense
because of the ubiquity of larger scale lines.
Why would geographical aggregation need bigger lines?
lf Of
Iljitsch van Beijnum
Sent: Tuesday, November 30, 2004 2:55 PM
To: NANOG list
Subject: Re: Sensible geographical addressing [Was: 16 vs 32 bit ASNs yadda,
yadda]
On 30-nov-04, at 16:29, Scott Morris wrote:
> In the interconnected world, geography is very much irrelevant to best
> path rou
On 30-nov-04, at 16:29, Scott Morris wrote:
In the interconnected world, geography is very much irrelevant to best
path
routing. It's all about speeds and feeds where a local-access T-1 is
obviously not preferable to a cross-country OC-3.
I have a very hard time seeing this as a realistic example
On Tue, 30 Nov 2004, David Barak wrote:
> What exactly would be so bad about taking a page from
> the PSTN and using a country-code-like system? There
> are under 200 countries on the whole planet, so that's
> not a huge number of bits...
...and what if you're operating in
--- Peter Corlett <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> David Barak <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> [...]
> > What exactly would be so bad about taking a page
> from the PSTN and
> > using a country-code-like system? There are under
> 200 countries on
> > the whole planet, so that's not a huge number of
TECTED] On Behalf Of
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, November 30, 2004 9:28 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Sensible geographical addressing [Was: 16 vs 32 bit ASNs yadda,
yadda]
> Anything that takes geography into the routing is plain and simple
> broken.
Then why do major American provid
CTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of
David Barak
Sent: Tuesday, November 30, 2004 9:58 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Sensible geographical addressing
--- [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> 10 years ago we didn't have the RIR system in place to help us with
> geographic address
David Barak <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
[...]
> What exactly would be so bad about taking a page from the PSTN and
> using a country-code-like system? There are under 200 countries on
> the whole planet, so that's not a huge number of bits...
Not that this avoids renumbering, as countries do occas
--- [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> 10 years ago we didn't have the RIR system in
> place to help us with geographic addressing. Today
> we do. Now you might be able to convince me that
> we could achieve similar goals by putting together
> route registries, RIRs and some magic pixie dust.
> As far a
> -Original Message-
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Tuesday, November 30, 2004 9:28 AM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Sensible geographical addressing [Was: 16 vs 32 bit
> ASNs yadda,
> yadda]
>
>
>
> > This i
> This is broken by design. What would have happend if this
> had be done before the fiber glut in the late 90's? As far
> as I am aware a couple of new fiber routes have been build
> and a few more cities have become nodes.
I am not suggesting time machines. I am proposing that
this be done no
12 matches
Mail list logo
