[13473] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: IPv8 < IPv6
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Alan Hannan)
Thu Nov 6 17:36:47 1997
Date: Thu, 6 Nov 1997 16:35:01 -0500
From: Alan Hannan <hannan@bythetrees.com>
To: Paul Ferguson <ferguson@cisco.com>
Cc: nanog@merit.edu
In-Reply-To: <3.0.3.32.19971106160546.007d5880@lint.cisco.com>; from Paul Ferguson on Thu, Nov 06, 1997 at 04:05:46PM -0500
Paul,
We agree on all but this small point. Certainly one should
allocate ip address space in a topological manner. However, I
know of several large NSP/ISPs that don't because there's no
[technological or economic] punitive incentive for them to do so.
I believe that the correlation between topology and geography will
increase as a function of time.
In fact, I believe that today the correlation is quite high.
The lack of correlation is the exception, in my experience, than
the rule.
-alan
Quoting Paul Ferguson (ferguson@cisco.com):
> At 02:19 PM 11/6/97 -0500, Alan Hannan wrote:
>
> >
> > Accordingly, not allocating in a geographic fashion lends to
> > deaggregation, which is bad.
> >
>
> Correction: Not allocating in a topological fashion lends to
> deaggregation. Geography often has nothing to do with it.
>
> - paul
