[92220] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: [routing-wg]BGP Update Report
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Marshall Eubanks)
Mon Sep 11 14:12:50 2006
In-Reply-To: <20060911173414.GA31407@vaf-lnx1.cisco.com>
Cc: Gert Doering <gert@Space.Net>,
Oliver Bartels <oliver@bartels.de>,
"cidr-report@potaroo.net" <cidr-report@potaroo.net>,
"nanog@merit.edu" <nanog@merit.edu>,
"routing-wg@ripe.net" <routing-wg@ripe.net>
From: Marshall Eubanks <tme@multicasttech.com>
Date: Mon, 11 Sep 2006 13:54:54 -0400
To: Vince Fuller <vaf@cisco.com>
Errors-To: owner-nanog@merit.edu
Hello;
On Sep 11, 2006, at 1:34 PM, Vince Fuller wrote:
>> On Mon, Sep 11, 2006 at 10:28:49AM -0700, Vince Fuller wrote:
>>> One might also imagine that more globally-friendly way to
>>> implement this
>>> would have been to build a network (VPN would be adequate)
>>> between the
>>> ground stations and assign each plane a prefix out of a block
>>> whose subnets
>>> are only dynamically advertsed within that network/VPN. Doing
>>> that would
>>> prevent the rest of the global Internet from having to track 1000
>>> + routing
>>> changes per prefix per day as satellite handoffs are performed.
>>
>> As has been said before, and is also readable in that blog entry: the
>> system is supposed to create *one* advertisement change when the
>> plane
>> is crossing from the "Europe" to the "US" ground station (etc.), not
>> 1000+.
>
> The comment still applies. Imagine that this system were
> implemented globally
> on all international/intercontinental air routes. It would still be
> nice to
> avoid having each of those airplanes cause a globally-visible
> routing update
> whenever it crosses some geographical boundary.
>
In a typical flight Europe / China I believe that there would be
order 10-15 satellite transponder / ground
station changes. The satellite footprints count for more that the
geography.
> --Vince
>
Regards
Marshall
