Shim6, was: Re: filtering /48 is going to be necessary

Thu Mar 15 14:25:46 UTC 2012

On Thu, Mar 15, 2012 at 9:58 AM, Eugen Leitl <eugen at leitl.org> wrote:
> On Thu, Mar 15, 2012 at 09:57:10PM +0900, Masataka Ohta wrote:
>> >> That's one reason why we should stay away from IPv6.
>> > What prevents you from using
>> > http://www.nature.com/ncomms/journal/v1/n6/full/ncomms1063.html
>> > with IPv6?
>>
>> Though I didn't paid $32 to read the full paper, it's like
>> a proposal of geography based addressing.
>
> You can access the free full text at http://arxiv.org/pdf/1009.0267v2.pdf

Hi Eugen,

Geographic routing strategies have been all but proven to irredeemably
violate the recursive commercial payment relationships which create
the Internet's topology. In other words, they always end up stealing
bandwidth on links for which neither the source of the packet nor it's
destination have paid for a right to use.

This is documented in a 2008 Routing Research Group thread.
http://www.ops.ietf.org/lists/rrg/2008/msg01781.html

If you have a new geographic routing strategy you'd like to table for
consideration, start by proving it doesn't share the problem.

Regards,
Bill Herrin

-- 
William D. Herrin ................ herrin at dirtside.com  bill at herrin.us
3005 Crane Dr. ...................... Web: <http://bill.herrin.us/>
Falls Church, VA 22042-3004