[address-policy-wg] 2011-02 New Policy Proposal (Removal of multihomed requirement for IPv6)
- Previous message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] 2011-02 New Policy Proposal (Removal of multihomed requirement for IPv6)
- Next message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] 2011-02 New Policy Proposal (Removal of multihomed requirement for IPv6)
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Mikael Abrahamsson
swmike at swm.pp.se
Thu Apr 21 15:55:23 CEST 2011
On Thu, 21 Apr 2011, Florian Weimer wrote: > * Mikael Abrahamsson: > >> I don't want the money, I just want there to be *substantial cost* to >> take up a DFZ slot. > > And degrade overall routing quality because networks cannot afford > announcing shorter paths? I don't think this is a good idea. Please elaborate. I don't understand your reasoning. How does de-aggregation improve routing quality? -- Mikael Abrahamsson email: swmike at swm.pp.se
- Previous message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] 2011-02 New Policy Proposal (Removal of multihomed requirement for IPv6)
- Next message (by thread): [address-policy-wg] 2011-02 New Policy Proposal (Removal of multihomed requirement for IPv6)
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]