On Tuesday, April 29, 2003, at 12:31 PM, John C Klensin wrote:
It seems to me that if you, or anyone else, wants to make the case
that the IPv6 address space isn't going to be large enough, you need
to do so explicitly and immediately
John,
For purposes of geographic routing, it seems a little tight. Consider
this proposal [1]
| 4 | 44 | 16 | 64 bits
|
+---+-------------------------+--------+---------------------------+
|FP | Reference | SLA | Interface ID
|
+---+-------------------------+--------+---------------------------+
44 bits are provider independent and encode GPS coordinates. It's
enough to have accuracy to roughly 10 meter squares. BUT ... that
doesn't consider altitude. In addition, it's quite easy to see that 10
meter squares may be a little bit too big for some purposes, even if
you're just talking about individual homes. Also, it doesn't provide a
mechanism to define an area rather than a point. I could go on.
So it's clear at least to me that under this scheme there is not enough
space in IPv6 to do proper justice to georouting.
simon
[1] http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-hain-ipv6-pi-addr-04.txt
--
www.simonwoodside.com -- 99% Devil, 1% Angel