|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| home | help | back | first | fref | pref | prev | next | nref | lref | last | post |
Date: Tue, 18 Oct 2005 09:32:35 +0300 (EEST) From: Pekka Savola <pekkas@netcore.fi> To: Michael.Dillon@btradianz.com Cc: nanog@merit.edu In-Reply-To: <OF4167E704.3AC3E36F-ON8025709D.004CD00E-8025709D.004D5DDD@btradianz.com> Errors-To: owner-nanog@merit.edu On Mon, 17 Oct 2005 Michael.Dillon@btradianz.com wrote: >> http://arneill-py.sacramento.ca.us/ipv6mh/geov6.txt >> will be quite of your liking. > > Not at all. This proposal is all about allocating addresses > based on country boundaries and I reject this model. The > Internet is a network of cities, not countries. The national > boundaries are completely random in technical terms, but > the cities are not random. The cities are where the people > are, where the railways and roads are, where the channels > of trade and communication begin and end. Uhh, I'd say the internet is a network of networks, not a network of cities. :) But you bring a good point about railways. But are there enough privately-owned railways to make a good analogue? (This certainly doesn't apply to roads) I.e., when a dozen different railway companies want to provide transport, do each and every one of them build (parallel) tracks, stations, and trains on each city? I do not think so, but I do not know if any sort of "roaming" agreements exist. Or are you arguing that the basic infra (like the fibers) should be city/government/etc. controlled so it could be used in more cost-effective ways by all providers? -- Pekka Savola "You each name yourselves king, yet the Netcore Oy kingdom bleeds." Systems. Networks. Security. -- George R.R. Martin: A Clash of Kings
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| home | help | back | first | fref | pref | prev | next | nref | lref | last | post |