nanog mailing list archives
RE: Sensible geographical addressing [Was: 16 vs 32 bit ASNs yadda, yadda]
From: "Scott Morris" <swm () emanon com>
Date: Tue, 30 Nov 2004 19:43:05 -0500
Because then the specificity of the routes would become less relevant. If you have two highways available to you, then it's 6 of one and half dozen of another. You could care less which way you go. -----Original Message----- From: owner-nanog () merit edu [mailto:owner-nanog () merit edu] On Behalf Of Iljitsch van Beijnum Sent: Tuesday, November 30, 2004 7:01 PM To: swm () emanon com Cc: 'NANOG list' Subject: Re: Sensible geographical addressing [Was: 16 vs 32 bit ASNs yadda, yadda] On 30-nov-04, at 23:32, Scott Morris wrote:
At large NAP points (the higher order ISP's) this may make some sense because of the ubiquity of larger scale lines.
Why would geographical aggregation need bigger lines?
Current thread:
- Re: Sensible geographical addressing [Was: 16 vs 32 bit ASNs yadda, yadda] Iljitsch van Beijnum (Nov 30)
- RE: Sensible geographical addressing [Was: 16 vs 32 bit ASNs yadda, yadda] Scott Morris (Nov 30)