Unfortunately there isn't much new under the sun. This appears to be a combination of geographic addressing (various sources, e.g. Steve Deering and Tony Hain) and RFC1955. Geographic addressing has deployability issues -- search for archives of those arguments. The problem with mapping based on ASs is that they are the wrong granularity for external routing. They are either too coarse (different prefixes within an AS need different treatment) or too fine. I've CCed the Routing Research Group. I suggest you take further discussion there, but remember what's said about mud-wrestling with a pig. Scott Matthew allegedly wrote on 04/16/2010 15:07 EDT: > I would like to propose the following concept for discussion. The idea > is to either extend IPv4 or create a new protocol that would work with > IPv4 in order to allow a backwards compatible, yet hierarchical > addressing model. The format is ruff and I wish others to evaluate its > feasibility. > > The general layout of a fully-unique address follows: > > <96-bit identifier based on region, service provider, etc> <32-bit > IPv4 style address> > > In addition, organizations with an ASN would have the following > fully-unique address: > > <16 or 32-bit ASN> <96-bit ID> <32-bit IPv4 style address> > > ASN's could be registered to multiple Service Providers without making > a large mess to the tables. > > Individual hosts would only use their IPv4 style address for local > access and wouldn't need the full address unless talking outside their > organization and/or ISP. > > Internet routing tables would only need 96-bit IDs and BGP tables > would only need ASN to 96-bit ID mappings. > > When talking to a host that has an ASN you could get away with only > sending to <ASN> + <IPv4 style address> since the ASN to 96-bit ID > would be mapped on the Internet and the local ISP would then know > where to route the IPv4 style address once it was within their area. > > This could be done by extending IPv4 or by creating a new protocol, > i.e. Area Routing Protocol (AP for short). > > During transition, legacy IPv4 hosts would talk to a gateway device > which would know its 96-bit ID and allow communication with the new > protocol. > _______________________________________________ > Ietf mailing list > Ietf@xxxxxxxx > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf _______________________________________________ Ietf mailing list Ietf@xxxxxxxx https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf