--On March 6, 2006 12:46:51 PM +0100 Iljitsch van Beijnum <iljitsch@muada.com> wrote:
On 6-mrt-2006, at 3:52, Roland Dobbins wrote:
fixed geographic allocations (another nonstarter for reasons which have been elucidated previously)
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.
Early proposals for doing any geographic stuff were fatally flawed but there is enough correlation between geography and topology to allow for useful savings. Even if it's only at the continent level that would allow for about an 80% reduction of routing tables in the future when other continents reach the same level of multihoming as North America and Europe.
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. OTOH, I haven't seen anyone propose geotop allocation as a policy in the ARIN region (hint to those pushing for it). Owen -- If it wasn't crypto-signed, it probably didn't come from me.