[ppml] geo addressing

[Tony Li]

On Nov 22, 2005, at 3:46 PM, Owen DeLong wrote:

> What about sites that expand outside the aggregate, want to remain
> within their own aggregate for administrative purposes, but, also
> want local connectivity in their various offices around the world?
>
> Imagine, for example, that a company in the US, within an ARIN
> aggregate starts expanding internationally into Asia, Europe,
> Africa, and Latin America.  Imagine that such company feels that
> their existing /32 is adequate, but, they want to be able to
> announce it (or a fraction of it) from their sites on each
> continent directly.
>
> The reality is that geo. addressing only works if the world
> stands still.  The world does not stand still, so, geo.
> addressing trends towards entropy.


Owen,

What matters is where the individual site is connected.

If a multinational has a HQ in one area, then they should get a
prefix in that area.  If they have an office in another area, then
how they should proceed depends entirely on the topological
situation.

If the remote site is only connected via HQ, then the site should be
numbered via the HQ prefix.  If the site is only connected locally,
then they should be numbered out of the local area.  If they are
connected via both, then we're gonna have the multihoming
argument (again).

Yes, a strict geographic address proponent would number them
out of the geographic prefix regardless of connectivity.  That's
perhaps not the only way...

Tony