[46875] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: references on non-central authority network protocols
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Jasper Wallace)
Sun Apr 14 22:42:51 2002
Date: Mon, 15 Apr 2002 03:41:49 +0100 (BST)
From: Jasper Wallace <jasper@ivision.co.uk>
To: Stephen Sprunk <ssprunk@cisco.com>
Cc: Patrick Thomas <root@utility.clubscholarship.com>,
<nanog@merit.edu>
In-Reply-To: <00a701c1e345$3b0f46b0$e1876540@amer.cisco.com>
Message-ID: <Pine.GSO.4.30.0204140200100.8651-100000@avengers.ivision.co.uk>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Errors-To: owner-nanog-outgoing@merit.edu
On Sat, 13 Apr 2002, Stephen Sprunk wrote:
>
> Thus spake "Patrick Thomas" <root@utility.clubscholarship.com>
> > I am looking for any and all research (and perhaps your
> > comments), references, etc. regarding replacements for the
> > TCP/IP protocol that do not require centralized authority
> > structures (central authority to assign network numbers).
>
> Please explain how you think any protocol could support non-trivial numbers
> of users without some arbiter to prevent address collisions.
Location - either distribute all the addresses evenly over the planet or try
to map to population density.
(the higher your density of sites, the more accurate your coordinates need
to be).
you could aggregate addresses by doing something like:
2 hemispheres
36 'triangular' chunks spaced every 10 degrees latitude.
then split up in longditudernal stripes.
but i think you'd be better allocation on the basis of population density.
How exactly you'd make the social and economic changes to get to a system
like this vs, the telcos/isps we have now is probably more trouble than it's
worth ;-P
> There are several alternatives to TCP being researched, but there are
> currently no viable alternatives to IP.
--
Internet Vision Internet Consultancy Tel: 020 7589 4500
60 Albert Court & Web development Fax: 020 7589 4522
Prince Consort Road vision@ivision.co.uk
London SW7 2BE http://www.ivision.co.uk/
