[manet] Re: BABEL question
"Templin \(US\), Fred L" <[email protected]> Fri, 25 Jul 2025 21:44:23 +0000
| Newsgroups | gmane.ietf.manet |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <BN0P110MB1420DCF66E01CF57CF198538A359A@BN0P110MB1420.NAMP110.PROD.OUTLOOK.COM> |
Henning, I think you are the one that is not comprehending - please go back and reread the past couple and ask again more nicely if you are still confused. Thank you - Fred > -----Original Message----- > From: Henning Rogge <[email protected]> > Sent: Friday, July 25, 2025 2:14 PM > To: Templin (US), Fred L <[email protected]> > Cc: Juliusz Chroboczek <[email protected]>; [email protected] List <[email protected]> > Subject: Re: [manet] Re: BABEL question > > > OK, if our big-picture world views coincide that is good - we are therefore both > > considering a population size at least as large as the number of people on the > > planet. Google "how many cellphones are there in the world" says: > > There is a reason why cellphones are organized in CELLS... each of > them being tightly organized and aggregated into prefixes by the > provider. > > > "There are currently more mobile phones than people in the world. While the > > exact number fluctuates, estimates suggest there are over 12 billion mobile > > connections worldwide" > > Sorry, this discussion is getting somewhat silly or even insane... > > There is not a single routing protocol in the world that can deal with > billions of nodes or prefixes... > There is not a single adhoc routing protocol that can deal with > hundreds of thousands or nodes in a dynamic environment, even ten > thousands is beyond challenging. > > (lets ignore the fact that most adhoc capable radio technologies > provide a serious restriction on the number of devices within a > collision domain for now) > > > > > So, the population size should be on the order of 10^10 with aspirations > > > > of becoming larger still. > > Saying you want a prefix for a flat adhoc routing domain with 10^10 > routing entries is ridiculous. > > And you have yet to answer what is wrong about just selecting your /64 > part based on the MAC or EUI-64 part of your radio... no collision and > more address space than we will EVER need on Earth. > > I think you don't comprehend the scales you are talking about... > especially the technical issues. > > Henning Rogge _______________________________________________ manet mailing list -- [email protected] To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]