Re: [lir-wg] Discussion about RIPE-261

[Nils Ketelsen <]

On Thu, May 29, 2003 at 11:36:16AM +0200, Andre Oppermann wrote:
> Nils Ketelsen wrote:

> > So, what we really want is PI addresses. And with the current pratices they
> > just do not aggregate which also is a bad thing. This is why I think the
> > geographical approach already mentioned on the list (one netblock per
> > country, different sizes depending on population) currently is the approach
> > which fits that need best, I believe.
> 
> How do you come to that conclusion? Every other PI space will be with
> another ISP. So even thought you might have everything close together
> on a "human logic" level there is no way to aggregate the prefixes
> together in the routing system. Unless of course you want to do it
> PTT style where one is the one who routes this block.

I think in most cases the "human logic level" also works for routing. So
I guess many people will carry the complete routingtable for those countries
they communicate a lot with (mostly this will be the own country and some
nearby, but YMMV) and just have a few aggregates like "send all traffic to
$farcountry1 to uplink A, send all for $farcountry2 via uplink B etc".

Communication mostly happens in the same way "human logic" does, because in
the end its humans initiating the communication. 

I think this could be a good compromise between every multihomed user has to
be in every routing table and ongoing provider dependance.

Nils

-- 
Please let us know if your SunSolve visit saved you a call to Sun Support!
Access Denied

 [komplette Auskunft zu einem Patch auf http://sunsolve.sun.com/]