[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: regionalized addresses, RIRs, and table size
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> IMHO - The concept of geographic based, or regionalized addresses
> recently mentioned seems to merit some review in light of recent
> other discussions.
> Possible positive impacts of geographic based IPv6 addresses are:
> * Ability to have smaller allocations within a region without
> bloating the global rout table.
> * It compliments regional peering.
> * It tends to aggregate globally.
> * Impact of networks without extra regional topologies
You forgot "does not fit current topology". This has been discussed
here before. I still think this is a larger problem that people assume.
> All the multi-homed proposals seem a lot more of a problem
> than geographic based address allocation. Why not apply
> the analog of Occam's Razor to this problem. If geographic
> allocations provide the simple solution, why not reevaluate?
There is more to aggregation than just routing table growth. Currently
this is also to a large extent the expression of a providers' routing
policy. This is normally an expression of their business plan.
There are enough Tier-1/Providers with worldwide coverage in here -
There is more to this than meets the eye.
- - kurtis -
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: PGP 8.0.2
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----