North American Network Operators Group
Date Prev | Date Next | Date Index | Thread Index | Author Index | Historical

Re: who gets a /32 [Re: IPV6 renumbering painless?]

  • From: Valdis.Kletnieks
  • Date: Mon Nov 22 15:43:09 2004 
On Mon, 22 Nov 2004 21:28:06 +0100, Iljitsch van Beijnum said:

> The general objection (apart from incorrect assumptions based on old 
> incomplete work) is that network topology and geography don't 
> correlate. My counter-objection is that the correlation doesn't have to 
> be 1 to be able to take advantage of it when it's present.

On the other hand, unless you have some way to *enforce* a higher correlation
than we already have, how do you propose to get a better result than we
currently (mostly accidentally) get via CIDR aggregation?

For instance, 212.x.y.z is "known" to be on one continent, and so on - but
how do you leverage that into a 212/8 routing entry?

Attachment: pgp00065.pgp
Description: PGP signature