2 years, 4 months ago
Why is there a relation between addressing and routing ? What is the difference between flat and hierarchical addressing ?
Separate topics with commas, or by pressing return. Use the delete or backspace key to edit or remove existing topics.
You can leave an optional "tip" with Mahalo's virtual currency, Mahalo Dollars. If you are asking a difficult question that might require some research, or if you'd like a wide variety of feedback, a higher tip often leads to more answers to your question.
M$1 Answer
If you need to scale, there is a relation, else there is none.
- This is one of the difference between the design of LAN addresses (used by bridges) and IP addresses (used by IP routers).
Routing scales by reducing the size of the virtual network seen by interior nodes, i.e. reduce the size of routing tables and messages exchanged.
- For example, consider a distant galaxy. Seen from the earth, it seems like a single node. So a simple strategy is to send messages for planets in the galaxy in that general direction.
- This means that the “address size” and “address space” for this virtual network is also smaller – typically subsets of the original address space. This is the essence of “ address aggregation.”
- In the Internet, a router looks at the network number as the “address” of the “virtual node” i.e. the destination network .. For example: In the Internet a router may consider the entire network 10.* as a single node.
Flat addresses give no such clues to routing protocols.
- Flat addressing simplifies address administration but does not scale.
- LAN addresses are flat in terms of routing. They do have a 2-level administrative hierarchy (OUI and the 24-bit number assigned by the OUI owner) – which does not correspond to the hierarchy network physical or logical partitioning.
- For eg: the nodes assigned addresses 10.* should be reachable through a single border router (and topologically nearby – else routing becomes much less optimal)
- This is one of the difference between the design of LAN addresses (used by bridges) and IP addresses (used by IP routers).
Routing scales by reducing the size of the virtual network seen by interior nodes, i.e. reduce the size of routing tables and messages exchanged.
- For example, consider a distant galaxy. Seen from the earth, it seems like a single node. So a simple strategy is to send messages for planets in the galaxy in that general direction.
- This means that the “address size” and “address space” for this virtual network is also smaller – typically subsets of the original address space. This is the essence of “ address aggregation.”
- In the Internet, a router looks at the network number as the “address” of the “virtual node” i.e. the destination network .. For example: In the Internet a router may consider the entire network 10.* as a single node.
Flat addresses give no such clues to routing protocols.
- Flat addressing simplifies address administration but does not scale.
- LAN addresses are flat in terms of routing. They do have a 2-level administrative hierarchy (OUI and the 24-bit number assigned by the OUI owner) – which does not correspond to the hierarchy network physical or logical partitioning.
- For eg: the nodes assigned addresses 10.* should be reachable through a single border router (and topologically nearby – else routing becomes much less optimal)
You can leave an optional "tip" with Mahalo's virtual currency, Mahalo Dollars. If you are asking a difficult question that might require some research, or if you'd like a wide variety of feedback, a higher tip often leads to more answers to your question.
M$
FYI - examville as a source is really poo-pooed here on mahalo. Otherwise your question was great!