[151311] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: Shim6, was: Re: filtering /48 is going to be necessary
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Tim Franklin)
Thu Mar 15 14:24:23 2012
Date: Thu, 15 Mar 2012 18:23:13 -0000 (GMT)
From: Tim Franklin <tim@pelican.org>
To: nanog@nanog.org
In-Reply-To: <161600.1331833694@turing-police.cc.vt.edu>
Errors-To: nanog-bounces+nanog.discuss=bloom-picayune.mit.edu@nanog.org
> I don't think the term means what Masataka thinks it means, because nobody
> in this discussion is talking in terms of circuits rather than packet routing.
Geographical addressing can tend towards "bellhead thinking", in the sense that it assumes a small number (one?) of suppliers servicing all end users in a geographical area, low mobility, higher traffic volumes towards other end-users in the same or a close geography, relative willingness to renumber when a permanent change of location does occur, and simple, tightly defined interconnects where these single-suppliers can connect to the neighbouring single-supplier and their block of geography.
I'm not sure he's right, but I think I understand what he's getting at.
Regards,
Tim.
