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/address-policy-wg@ripe.net/
[address-policy-wg] The flexibility of IPv4 routing
- Previous message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] 2005-12 New Draft Document Published (4-Byte AS Number Policy)
- Next message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] The flexibility of IPv4 routing
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Florian Weimer
fw at deneb.enyo.de
Thu May 11 20:53:11 CEST 2006
According to this article: <http://www.renesys.com/blog/2006/04/tracking_plane_flight_on_inter.shtml> Connexion uses BGP and the Internet routing table to implement IP mobility: | So how did they solve it? They assigned a /24 (256 globally visible IP | addresses) to each plane. They announce that network from the origin | site (in my case, Europe since I took off from Germany). When the | plane is between the two satellites and in view of each, it is | programmed to re-connect to the North American satellite. So traffic | is always getting to the ground the fastest it can, minimizing | latency. Certainly a cool hack, although I'm not sure if the leak of the /24s to the global routing table is intended. It's not necessary to minimize latency. Perhaps Connexion does not operate an intercontinental AS, though -- which would mean that two planes using different head stations could not communicate with each other at the IP layer. Anyway, I wish you guys could bring this kind of flexibility to the IPv6 world. 8-)
- Previous message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] 2005-12 New Draft Document Published (4-Byte AS Number Policy)
- Next message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] The flexibility of IPv4 routing
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]