[43119] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: The Gorgon's Knot. Was: Re: Verio Peering Question
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Alex Bligh)
Sat Sep 29 06:10:11 2001
Date: Sat, 29 Sep 2001 11:09:33 +0100
From: Alex Bligh <alex@alex.org.uk>
Reply-To: Alex Bligh <alex@alex.org.uk>
To: Sean Donelan <sean@donelan.com>, Valdis.Kletnieks@vt.edu
Cc: "E.B. Dreger" <eddy+public+spam@noc.everquick.net>,
nanog@merit.edu, Alex Bligh <alex@alex.org.uk>
Message-ID: <1257364172.1001761772@[195.224.237.69]>
In-Reply-To: <Pine.GSO.4.40.0109282210520.28431-100000@clifden.donelan.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Disposition: inline
Errors-To: owner-nanog-outgoing@merit.edu
--On Friday, 28 September, 2001 10:12 PM -0400 Sean Donelan
<sean@donelan.com> wrote:
> Of course, we could adopt geographic allocations. North American is
> still working on (+1) in e.164 space. We could shrink the global
> route table to a few thousand routes.
We have this at a continental level. At less than a continental
level the argument against this is that at lower distances there
is a poorer and poorer map between geographic proximity and
(network) topological proximity. Pick any major US city without
a popular peering point / private peering for a trivial example.
Alex Bligh
Personal Capacity
