On 9 Jan 2013, at 07:56, Peter Lothberg <roll at Stupi.SE> wrote: Hello! The current way I allocate node numbers is in sequential order and it's = getting tremendously messy and difficult to manage, so I am going to = come up with a plan to divide things more cleanly and I'm looking for = feedback. Why is it messy? Putting administrative info in addresses that are most likely network endpoints? I'd just feel more organised if I grouped systems a bit more. If we at some time in the future want to get the routing optimal there is one limitation to remember. There is no topology information shared between areas, so if a node in area 1 want's to talk to a node in area 2 and there are more than one link from area 1 to area 2 it will pick the best (metric or router id) link to area 2, and it has no information about what area router in area 2 is closest to the destination node. There'd only be one link to the rest of HECnet, everything else would connect to the primary area router. An optimal HECnet has metrics (costs on links) and all nodes in the same area..... Or one area is basically connecting all it's area routers with for practical purposes infinite bandwidth. --P -- Cory Smelosky http://gewt.net/ Personal stuff! http://gimme-sympathy.org/ My permanently-a-work-in-progress pet project.