Are routers inside a given geo-patch required to interconnect?  That is, will a 
packet which is delivered to any given router inside a geopatch be guaranteed 
to be delivered to some other router in the same geopatch?
 
I believed Tony asked this question a few times, I've yet to see a clear answer.
 
-Darrel


________________________________

        From: rrg-boun...@irtf.org [mailto:rrg-boun...@irtf.org] On Behalf Of 
heinerhum...@aol.com
        Sent: Tuesday, January 12, 2010 2:25 PM
        To: li...@cs.ucla.edu; rrg@irtf.org
        Subject: Re: [rrg] Aggregatable EIDs
        
        
        
        Lixia,
        Once more: My geolocation-based TARA concept is FUNDAMENTALLY different 
from all three proposals you are mentioning (Steve Deering's Metro-based..., 
Hain-draft, Giro). If I had no better computational tools at hand than Deering, 
Hain or the UCLA group, I would either be absolutely silent          - or in 
the ILNP camp:-)
         
        Lixia, I know, you have a lot of ideas, how to make prefix-handling 
more sophisticated.
        My point however  is: Get rid of any (Unicast) prefix building. TARA is 
about providing a well-skimmed topological view of the internet (which prevents 
table size problems as well as update churn). As opposed to all submitted 
proposals, TARA is the only one which can provide a perfect visualization: Use 
Google to search for a route from NY, Time Square, to S.F, Lambert Street - and 
play with the different zooms !!!
         
        Heiner
         
         
        In einer eMail vom 12.01.2010 19:39:25 Westeuropäische Normalzeit 
schreibt li...@cs.ucla.edu:

                On Dec 27, 2009, at 7:43 PM, Brian E Carpenter wrote:
                
                > Hi,
                >
                > On 2009-12-28 14:17, Xu Xiaohu wrote:
                > ...
                >>> This argument fails for exactly the same reason that 
geographically
                >>> based BGP aggregation fails.
                >>
                >> Brian, who has ever done it ?
                >
                > Nobody, as far as I know.
                >
                >> Why do you say this and what do you mean by saying this ?
                >
                > There have been a lot of geo-based or metro-based proposals 
over
                > the years. Most recently, draft-hain-ipv6-geo-addr.
                > As far as I know, none of them has ever been deployed, because
                > this isn't how Internet economics works. There is no financial
                > incentive to deploy geographically based exchange points 
which also
                > act as address delegators to customers. (Note, there is no 
technical
                > argument against it. But nobody knows how to make money out 
of it.)
                
                the above comment seems alluding to the long historical debate 
in geo- 
                based addressing, that the young folks here may not be totally 
aware  
                (I wish I were one of you people:).  So here are a few pointers 
to  
                related material.
                
                The concept was a rather old one, Greg Finn had some related 
proposal  
                back in early 80s (I didn't bother to hunt down the URL but I 
believe  
                a long tech report is still on the web).
                
                In the early days of IPv6 design, Steve Deering gave a strong 
pushing  
                in this direction.  The best ref is probably his plenary talk 
at July  
                1995 IETF meeting:
                "Metro-Based Addressing",
                
ftp://ftp.ietf.org/ietf-online-proceedings/95jul/presentations/allocation/deering.slides.ps
                
                This proposal was considered and debated at the time, but did 
not fly  
                (though effort in that direction continued on, e.g. the 
draft-hain- 
                ipv6-geo-addr mentioned above), mainly due to the reason that 
has been  
                articulated in this thread of exchanges: the model does not 
match the  
                ISP economics.
                
                However as it happens to any debate, opinions often swing 
further than  
                proper. From time to time one hears the interpretation from 
that  
                debate as "geo info cannot be used in routing" which is not the 
case.
                What that debate taught us (at least me) is that, for routing  
                decisions, ISP info must take the high order bit.
                However after that high order bit is taken into account, geo 
info can  
                be very useful to further optimize the routing decisions.
                as a simple evaluation, we used the BGP data from Rotueviews 
and RIPE  
                for a measurement study, the result is reported in a paper a 
few years  
                back:
                "Geographically Informed Inter-Domain Routing"
                http://www.cs.ucla.edu/~rveloso/papers/giro.pdf
                or if you just want a quick look of the idea, here is the 
presentation  
                slides:
                http://www.cs.ucla.edu/~rveloso/papers/07ICNP_giro.ppt
                
                Lixia
                
                _______________________________________________
                rrg mailing list
                rrg@irtf.org
                http://www.irtf.org/mailman/listinfo/rrg
                

         

_______________________________________________
rrg mailing list
rrg@irtf.org
http://www.irtf.org/mailman/listinfo/rrg

Reply via email to