Re: [GLOBAL-V6] Comments on AP Consensus

[Thomas Narten <narten@us.ibm.com>]

John L Crain <crain@icann.org> writes:

> >As I pointed on some IETF lists, I find the LIR definition somehow 
> >inconsistent with RIR and NIR.
> >If one was to follow the same logic, RIR, NIR and LIR would be similar 
> >(RIR assigns to NIR and LIR, NIR assigns to LIR) except for their scope:
> >
> >- RIR : ~continent.
> >- NIR : nation.
> >- LIR : city / metropolitan area.

> To me the thinking behind this seems to indicate addressing/routing based 
> on geography. Unless someone has a way to make routing work based on 
> continent/country/city borders rather than topological based on ISP's 
> border routers I don't see how this will work.

I agree.

> I do believe there have been Internet Drafts on geographically based 
> addressing schemes though. Not sure of the ID's names though?

Tony Hain's are the closest that we have today. There have been others
in the past, but they have expired. Let me also note that discussion
about the feasibility of some of those proposals was, shall we say,
spirited.

Thomas
-
- This list (global-v6) is handled by majordomo@lists.apnic.net