> I don't think the term means what Masataka thinks it means, because nobody
> in this discussion is talking in terms of circuits rather than packet routing.

Geographical addressing can tend towards "bellhead thinking", in the sense that 
it assumes a small number (one?) of suppliers servicing all end users in a 
geographical area, low mobility, higher traffic volumes towards other end-users 
in the same or a close geography, relative willingness to renumber when a 
permanent change of location does occur, and simple, tightly defined 
interconnects where these single-suppliers can connect to the neighbouring 
single-supplier and their block of geography.

I'm not sure he's right, but I think I understand what he's getting at.

Regards,
Tim.

Reply via email to