Re: [rrg] Aggregatable EIDs

[[e-mail]]

 
In einer eMail vom 26.12.2009 20:34:56 Westeuropäische Normalzeit schreibt  
[e-mail]:

This  argument fails for exactly the same reason that geographically
based BGP  aggregation fails.



Brian, who has ever done it ? Why do you say this and what do you mean by  
saying this ?
It must be something quite different from what I  understand.  
 
 
This thread "Aggregatable EIDs" is concerned about aggregating EIDs and the 
 problems with mapping the prefixes to RLOCs. This objective wouldn't even  
exist if both EID and RLOC-ID are  asigned a "third" information (I  
proposed it not long ago) which itself is universally routable and  which wouldn't 
need any authoritative provisioner either. No need for  aggregating any two 
EIDs! No need for mapping any EID-IP-address to any  RLOC-IP-address 
provided that they share a common attribute that is derived from  geographical 
coordinates.
 
By sticking to  non-routable identifiers none of the 14 solutions  becomes 
any better than LISP. 
Note, not only IPv4 / IPv6 addresses are non-routable, AS  numbers aren't 
either. 
 
With 99 % of the hosts being mobile, wouldn't it be appropriate to have  
mainly provider-independent FQDNs  
and a DNS that is fairly up-to-date with the correlation between a  
respective HIT and the current location, i.e. completely independent of the  
current AS? 
 
The geographic coordinates would be the only non-mobile data in a  world of 
mobile hosts, mobile routers and fast changed  providers
 
Heiner