RE: Sensible geographical addressing

["Scott Morris" <swm () emanon com>]

3 bits as a prefix would work perfectly fine IMHO.

This gives us an entire 32-bit space PER CONTINENT.  As I noted before I
don't think the penguins really need that many Ips in Antartica, but that
could always be set aside.  In addition, there's an extra set (only 7
continents at last count) for extra-terrestrial expansion or other needs.

And, that gives the ability to filter entire continents out if necessary.
The country code (ITU) isn't really a bad idea either, but I'm just thinking
less overall binary bits.

Scott 

-----Original Message-----
From: owner-nanog () merit edu [mailto:owner-nanog () merit edu] On Behalf Of
David Barak
Sent: Tuesday, November 30, 2004 9:58 AM
To: nanog () merit edu
Subject: Re: Sensible geographical addressing



--- Michael.Dillon () radianz com wrote:
> 10 years ago we didn't have the RIR system in place to help us with 
> geographic addressing. Today we do. Now you might be able to convince 
> me that we could achieve similar goals by putting together route 
> registries, RIRs and some magic pixie dust.
> As far as I'm concerned, geographical route aggregation is necessary 
> for the v6 network to scale. It will happen, the only question is how 
> we solve the problem.

What exactly would be so bad about taking a page from the PSTN and using a
country-code-like system?  There are under 200 countries on the whole
planet, so that's not a huge number of bits...



=====
David Barak
-fully RFC 1925 compliant-


                
__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!? 
All your favorites on one personal page  Try My Yahoo!
http://my.yahoo.com