Dave Taht <davet@teklibre.net> wrote:
    > going village to village on the same sat would save a ton of backhaul
    > bandwidth and offer less latency for things like phone calls. The CGN
    > (dang it) looks doomed to backhaul somewhere, but perhaps the ipv6
    > stuff?

As well as resiliency, and perhaps legal protection against NSL.

    > I imagine they do it at the l2 protocol and program the next hop(s) on
    > the ground, but we do live in an age where everything is centralized

"Simpler than IPv6" is all we ever got.
I think that it's MPLS or SR6 based upon some commodity fabric, with SDN to
create the paths.

    > (for those that don’t know, I’ve been working on distance-vector
    > routing protocols for decades, most of my work on that front for the
    > last decade has been focused on making the babel routing protocol scale
    > better than bgp does for meshy links )

--
Michael Richardson <mcr+IETF@sandelman.ca>   . o O ( IPv6 IøT consulting )
           Sandelman Software Works Inc, Ottawa and Worldwide