[ppml] 2005-1 status
> That seems to me the extent to which geotopological addressing will be
> feasible in the real world, where NSPs operate continental or global
> backbones. And if the current iteration of 2005-1 gets approved, we may
> end up there sooner than we expect.
I disagree on the feasibility question. This level of geotopological
addressing is certainly the easiest to achieve, however it is feasible
to take it to another level and subdivide the continental aggregates
in some logical, geographically-driven manner. I suggest that it should
be based on centers of interconnection, i.e. cities of 100,000
population or greater, and that it should not be overly concerned
with sharp boundaries. If ABC Inc. in Hooterville wants to use
Philadelphia addresses and XYZ Inc. wants to use Baltimore ones,
then that should be acceptable since they are not clearly in
one or the other population center.
LATAs are also a reasonable way of carving up the USA. Or just
making a six-way split along north/south and west/central/east
lines. In the long term, I think the best results will come
from using major cities as centers of gravity since that is
where the road, rail, air and telecom networks interconnect
> but I think we should seriously
> consider only issuing PI space to users whose size or network complexity
> makes the use of PA space for multihoming impractical.
Is there a practical, well-documented technique for
multihoming IPv6 with PA addresses?