--On March 7, 2006 4:29:28 PM +0100 Iljitsch van Beijnum <iljitsch@muada.com> wrote:
On 6-mrt-2006, at 22:08, Owen DeLong wrote:
What I hear is "any type of geography can't work because network topology != geography". That's like saying cars can't work because they can't drive over water which covers 70% of the earth's surface.
No, it's more like saying "Cars which can't operate off of freeways won't work" because there are a lot of places freeways don't go. Hmmm... Come to think of it, I haven't seen anyone selling a car which won't operate off of a freeway.
If we slightly open this up to "vehicles on wheels" and "long distance infrastructure created specially for said vehicles" trains would qualify...
True, and, a good case in point. A relatively small percentage of the US population finds trains routinely useful. An even smaller percentage (infinitessimal, actually) finds them useful enough to not have a car.
I've got no opposition to issuing addresses based on some geotop. design, simply because on the off chance it does provide useful aggregation, why not.
Exactly, that's all I ask.
OTOH, I haven't seen anyone propose geotop allocation as a policy in the ARIN region (hint to those pushing for it).
Hm, I would rather do this globally but maybe this is the way to go...
The only way to achieve global policy is to achieve a similar policy in each RIR and then get them to agree on a globally consistent one together. This is by design because it is a process which allows each region to have full input into the process without the stakeholders in any region being steamrolled by the needs of another region. Owen