[MLB-WIRELESS] National IP allocation and routing sche me??

[evilbunny]

Hello Simon,

>> Inter AP routing wouldn't matter, the only issue is with client's
>> being able to access servers...

SJM> Really?  If the node's router provides services like SMTP or IRC there is a
SJM> clear need to allow connections between the servers. It also is much
SJM> easier if you use a different address space for inter-node links from
SJM> "client IPs" (something which hasn't been mentioned much before) as IP
SJM> filtering can be implemented much easier if you can distinguish
SJM> "router" ips from "client" ips.

I think you missed one slight issue, for the client to talk to the
router it will obviously need to be on the same subnet, or at least
know how to talk to it...

SJM> I've entered this thread rather late, having been away from home for a
SJM> while, but I do hope that whatever addressing scheme is decided on
SJM> that it gets "registered" and duplicate addressing is avoided where
SJM> possible.

IPv6 is the only hope for a world wide parallel network such as what's
being proposed could happen...

SJM> Preassigning addresses "just in case" is great, but is not probably
SJM> realistic.  Other large radio networks like the ampr.org network (used
SJM> by radio hams) did this and a great part of the allocated space is
SJM> simply not used.  If we use dynamic routing protocols it's no longer
SJM> difficult to add more disjoint addresses to those that are being used
SJM> and this is much more "address friendly" than some of the selections
SJM> being suggested here.

Little problem with efficiency however, by tacking on later this
can do serious damage to route updates as links go up and down...
Because you can't summarise the routes more simply...

SJM> It's just a shame that there is no easy way to agree a global
SJM> assignment mechanism and to use that.  Now it doesn't matter much, but
SJM> in the future if the wireless networks grow as a lot of us hope then
SJM> things will become much more complicated.

It's not a matter of agreeing or disagreeing, we're building our own
internet (please no semantics) effectively with the potential to go
world wide, how much address space do you suppose this is likely to
take up?

-- 
Best regards,
 evilbunny                            mailto:evilbunny at sydneywireless.com

http://www.SydneyWireless.com - Exercise your communications
freedom to make it do what you never thought possible... 


To unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo at wireless.org.au
with "unsubscribe melbwireless" in the body of the message