[address-policy-wg] Policy proposal: #alpha: TLD Anycast Allocation Policy
- Previous message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] Policy proposal: #alpha: TLD Anycast Allocation Policy
- Next message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] Policy proposal: #alpha: TLD Anycast Allocation Policy
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Oliver Bartels
oliver at bartels.de
Thu Mar 31 17:38:08 CEST 2005
On Thu, 31 Mar 2005 16:23:36 +0100, Michael.Dillon at radianz.com wrote: >Geographical addressing means that a provider uses addresses >from a city aggregate for all infrastructure and customers >in that city. The city aggregate would be determined and >administered by RIPE. All providers who have infrastructure >in Paris, for instance, would ask RIPE for the number of >Paris addresses that they need, regardless of the size of >the operator or their dominance in the market. I don't see the point behind this, you would create even *more* table entries with this approach. There is operator A with customers in Paris, London and Berlin and operator B with customers in London, Manchester and Birmingham. Result: 6 Prefixes instead of 2. Why: Operator networks are *not* interconnected in regional area categories and prefer internal and peer routes instead of regional upstreams. >There already are "leading" operators and "sub-level" operators >in the Internet access market. Geo addressing does not change >this because geo-addressing is a technical solution to a >technical problem of packet routing. Sorry, I don't see this as an solution. This is the old Telco approach which works with *one* main operator in Paris, one in London etc. It does not work in a market with non-regional variable interconnections. E.g. we prefer to receive our traffic for Stuttgart in Munich or Frankfurt, because in Stuttgart there is no international exchange. >And the whole point of geo addressing is to avoid the update >of underdimensioned forwarding engines when insurance companies >require every company to be multihomed in order to qualify >for business insurance. Ceterum Censeo: Routing capacity can only be replaced by routing capacity. Someone has to *calculate* the best path for the IP packets and this someone is called "router". Either it can handle the address space or it cannot, in the second case IPv6 is *useless*. The point: There is no way to make a 1 H.P. 1900 car competitive in a Formula One race. Best Regards Oliver Bartels Oliver Bartels F+E + Bartels System GmbH + 85435 Erding, Germany oliver at bartels.de + http://www.bartels.de + Tel. +49-8122-9729-0
- Previous message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] Policy proposal: #alpha: TLD Anycast Allocation Policy
- Next message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] Policy proposal: #alpha: TLD Anycast Allocation Policy
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]