Re: [Nanog] Lies, Damned Lies, and Statistics [Was: Re: ATT VP: Internet to hit capacity by 2010]

["Alexander Harrowell" <a.harrowell () gmail com>]

On Wed, Apr 23, 2008 at 3:47 PM, Christopher Morrow <
christopher.morrow () gmail com> wrote:

> It strikes me that often just doing a reverse lookup on the peer
> address would be 'good enough' to keep things more 'local' in a
> network sense. Something like:
>
> 1) prefer peers with PTR's like mine (perhaps get address from a
> public-ish server - myipaddress.com/ipchicken.com/dshield.org)
> 2) prefer peers within my /24->/16 ?
>
> This does depend on what you define as 'local' as well, 'stay off my
> transit links' or 'stay off my last-mile' or 'stay off that godawful
> expensive VZ link from CHI to NYC in my backhaul network...


Well. here's your problem; depending on the architecture, the IP addressing
structure doesn't necessarily map to the network's cost structure. This is
why I prefer the P4P/DillTorrent announcement model.

Alex
_______________________________________________
NANOG mailing list
NANOG () nanog org
http://mailman.nanog.org/mailman/listinfo/nanog