Re: [RRG] Topology that follows addressing

[Iljitsch van Beijnum <iljitsch@muada.com>]

On 9 nov 2007, at 12:53, HeinerHummel@aol.com wrote:

[It seems that I can't reasonably quote anything from your message  
that shows the core idea.]

I understand this to be geographic routing, which goes even further  
than the geographic aggregation that is pretty much rejected out of  
hand whenever it comes up within the IETF (which is every couple of  
years or so).

Unless I'm mistaken, the idea is that geographic proximity equals  
topological proximity. I'm afraid that can't work in a wired network.  
If I'm in Holland I'm closer to Scotland than when I'm in Belgium. But  
if I want to travel to Scotland through the channel tunnel, I need to  
go through Belgium. So I need to get farther geographically to get  
closer topologically.

The way to solve this would be to lift the geo/topo alignment  
requirement as soon as you reach a certain zoom level. But then  
there's the traditional argument against geographic aggregation: how  
do you avoid ISPs having to carry traffic for free? In other words:  
who announces the aggregates to the rest of the world?

Are you familiar with Tony Hain's draft about geographic addressing?

--
to unsubscribe send a message to rrg-request@psg.com with the
word 'unsubscribe' in a single line as the message text body.
archive: <http://psg.com/lists/rrg/> & ftp://psg.com/pub/lists/rrg