|
North American Network Operators Group Date Prev | Date Next | Date Index | Thread Index | Author Index | Historical Re: references on non-central authority network protocols
At 03:40 PM 4/14/2002 -0500, Stephen Sprunk wrote: This line of suggestion indicates a goal of identification, rather than addressing.No, the trick is for a distributed algorithm to generate a non-trivial number of unique values for a (short) fixed-length field. Addressing is supposed to have relevance to the infrastructure topology, so that it indicates a place within the topology. As to the larger goal of non-centralized address assignment, the usual distinction is between administrative method, versus basis of assignment authority. Distributed (non-centralized) administration is not very difficult. As noted, the RIRs are a version of that. Independent assignment (multiple authorities) has not been achieved so far. Activities that appear to have this feature actually rely on a logical central authority, with operational coordination among the participants. The central authority in these cases is either some sort of statute or the cooperative enforcement of the participation community. d/ ---------- Dave Crocker <mailto:[email protected]> TribalWise, Inc. <http://www.tribalwise.com> tel +1.408.246.8253; fax +1.408.850.1850
|