RE: IPv8 < IPv6

[Rodney Joffe <rjoffe () genuity net>]

>   Alan Hannan said:
>
>   Physical topology is likely to map to geographic topology.
>   Circuits certainly do take odd L1 paths to connect L1 endpoints,
>   but these are exceptions, not he rule.
>
>   Accordingly, not allocating in a geographic fashion lends to
>   deaggregation, which is bad.
>
>  A good sentiment, but not neccessarily practical. The one constant we
> can count on is that things change.
        So, if I look at my crystal ball, and predict that I will need n
addresses in a particular physical location, using your planning
exemplar I will allocate n addresses in an aggregate. The fact that I
only need 1/2 n now means that I will temporarily waste 1/2 n. But what
happens when I need n + 1 addresses in that city? Which is the lesser of
two evils?

        So there is also a good argument to *not* rely on a congruence
of physical and geographic topology.

        Some form of NAT still appears preferable.
>   
Rodney Joffe
Chief Technology Officer
Genuity Inc., a Bechtel company
http://www.genuity.net