This archive is retained to ensure existing URLs remain functional. It will not contain any emails sent to this mailing list after July 1, 2024. For all messages, including those sent before and after this date, please visit the new location of the archive at https://mailman.ripe.net/archives/list/[email protected]/
[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 ]