Ah, no.
Everyone who keeps going on about embedding geographic information into the
names used by the path-selection is missing something really critical:
***Two computers which are _across the street from each other_, in geographic
terms, may be (and often, are) _many hops apart_, in network terms - because
they are connected to different ISPs whose geographically nearest point of
connection is a long way away (e.g. in another city).***
Geographic information about two computers tells you _nothing_ about how close
they are to each other, in terms of the path through the network between them.
That is why the names used in path selection have to be based on, and embody,
only the _actual network connectivity_.
Now, can we stop being hearing this ridiculous nonsense about embedding
geographic information in the names used by path-selection?
Noel
_______________________________________________
rrg mailing list
rrg@irtf.org
http://www.irtf.org/mailman/listinfo/rrg
