[53459] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: PAIX
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (David Diaz)
Thu Nov 14 20:59:32 2002
In-Reply-To: <Pine.GSO.4.21.0211150112160.11507-100000@meron.openu.ac.il>
Date: Thu, 14 Nov 2002 20:58:47 -0500
To: Rafi Sadowsky <rafi-nanog@meron.openu.ac.il>,
Vadim Antonov <avg@exigengroup.com>
From: David Diaz <techlist@smoton.net>
Cc: nanog@merit.edu
Errors-To: owner-nanog-outgoing@merit.edu
At 1:20 +0200 11/15/02, Rafi Sadowsky wrote:
>## On 2002-11-14 14:44 -0800 Vadim Antonov typed:
>
>VA>
>VA>
>VA> On Thu, 14 Nov 2002, David Diaz wrote:
>VA>
>VA> > 2) There is a lack of a killer app requiring peering every 100 sq Km.
>VA>
>VA> Peering every 100 sq km is absolutely infeasible. Just think of the
>VA> number of alternative paths routing algorithms wil lhave to consider.
>VA>
>VA> Anything like that would require serious redesign of Internet's routing
>VA> architecture.
>
> What about:
>
> IPv6 with hierarchial(sp?) geographical allocation ?
>
> BGP with some kind of tag limiting it to <N> AS hops ?
>( say N=2 or N=3? )
>
Hope count wont work. You would see the same hop count at all your
peering locations. How your traffic exited would depend on your IGP
decision tree. Do we want to get into exporting meds or tags? And
with >100 domestic peering points how would you manage that? Vadim
is correct, it would take a whole new protocol and that is unlikely.
Proof of that is IPv6. IPv4 is obviously still the big winner.
Doesnt this model sound a bit like internap to anyone? Why even have
a backbone if you have peering in every location.
>
>VA>
>VA> --vadim
>VA>
>VA>
>
>--
> Rafi
--
David Diaz
dave@smoton.net [Email]
pagedave@smoton.net [Pager]
Smotons (Smart Photons) trump dumb photons
