[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: Fallacy by Kurt (was Re: IPv6 Policy Clarification - Initial allocation criteria "d)")

To: Gert Doering <gert@space.net>
Subject: Re: Fallacy by Kurt (was Re: IPv6 Policy Clarification - Initial allocation criteria "d)")
From: Masataka Ohta <mohta@necom830.hpcl.titech.ac.jp>
Date: Wed, 23 Jun 2004 07:00:15 +0900
Cc: Kurt Erik Lindqvist <kurtis@kurtis.pp.se>, address-policy-wg@ripe.net, multi6@ops.ietf.org, Sascha Luck <ripe-lst@eirconnect.net>
In-reply-to: <20040622203411.GG6204@Space.Net>
References: <40D8185A.7030900@necom830.hpcl.titech.ac.jp> <E7618C9F-C445-11D8-860C-000A95928574@kurtis.pp.se> <40D82BE0.90404@necom830.hpcl.titech.ac.jp> <0B9FE26D-C44E-11D8-860C-000A95928574@kurtis.pp.se> <40D83B58.90906@necom830.hpcl.titech.ac.jp> <73777057-C456-11D8-860C-000A95928574@kurtis.pp.se> <40D84781.8020604@necom830.hpcl.titech.ac.jp> <2A874E04-C466-11D8-860C-000A95928574@kurtis.pp.se> <20040622185835.GC6204@Space.Net> <40D888A1.7070901@necom830.hpcl.titech.ac.jp> <20040622203411.GG6204@Space.Net>
User-agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv:1.4) Gecko/20030624 Netscape/7.1 (ax)

Gert Doering;

>>Note that routers in NLIs may have less performance than those
>>in TLIs.

> Why?

Because with minimum peering global traffic concentrates on peerings
between TLIs and because minimum links make the traffice concentrate
on backbone links of TLIs.

With extra links, extra peerings and associated policies, it is
possible to reduce the concentration or even have an NLI link
carry more traffic than links of TLIs.

							Masataka Ohta

References:
- Fallacy by Kurt (was Re: IPv6 Policy Clarification - Initial allocation criteria "d)")
  - From: Masataka Ohta <mohta@necom830.hpcl.titech.ac.jp>
- Re: Fallacy by Kurt (was Re: IPv6 Policy Clarification - Initial allocation criteria "d)")
  - From: Kurt Erik Lindqvist <kurtis@kurtis.pp.se>
- Re: Fallacy by Kurt (was Re: IPv6 Policy Clarification - Initial allocation criteria "d)")
  - From: Masataka Ohta <mohta@necom830.hpcl.titech.ac.jp>
- Re: Fallacy by Kurt (was Re: IPv6 Policy Clarification - Initial allocation criteria "d)")
  - From: Kurt Erik Lindqvist <kurtis@kurtis.pp.se>
- Re: Fallacy by Kurt (was Re: IPv6 Policy Clarification - Initial allocation criteria "d)")
  - From: Masataka Ohta <mohta@necom830.hpcl.titech.ac.jp>
- Re: Fallacy by Kurt (was Re: IPv6 Policy Clarification - Initial allocation criteria "d)")
  - From: Kurt Erik Lindqvist <kurtis@kurtis.pp.se>
- Re: Fallacy by Kurt (was Re: IPv6 Policy Clarification - Initial allocation criteria "d)")
  - From: Masataka Ohta <mohta@necom830.hpcl.titech.ac.jp>
- Re: Fallacy by Kurt (was Re: IPv6 Policy Clarification - Initial allocation criteria "d)")
  - From: Kurt Erik Lindqvist <kurtis@kurtis.pp.se>
- Re: Fallacy by Kurt (was Re: IPv6 Policy Clarification - Initial allocation criteria "d)")
  - From: Gert Doering <gert@space.net>
- Re: Fallacy by Kurt (was Re: IPv6 Policy Clarification - Initial allocation criteria "d)")
  - From: Masataka Ohta <mohta@necom830.hpcl.titech.ac.jp>
- Re: Fallacy by Kurt (was Re: IPv6 Policy Clarification - Initial allocation criteria "d)")
  - From: Gert Doering <gert@space.net>

Prev by Date: Re: optimum routing table size
Next by Date: Re: optimum routing table size
Previous by thread: Re: Fallacy by Kurt (was Re: IPv6 Policy Clarification - Initial allocation criteria "d)")
Next by thread: Re: [address-policy-wg] Re: Fallacy by Kurt
Index(es):
- Date
- Thread