Ya - that pretty much sums it up - interesting model dubious
application in reality.
Homogenous, in this context, does not mean similar platform
connectivity, but nodes with same degree connecting to each other. It
is more likely for a node with ten connections to connect to other
nodes with ten connections than one with one or two connections. The
Internet is heterogenous. So, take UUnet as your nodes at the AS level
and lets say it has 1700 or so connections to other AS's. Most of
those other AS's would not not also have 1700 connections, thus it is
heterogenous.
Lots of problems in applying that to cascading failures in reality -
making AS701 disappear, BGP allowing a cascading traffic failure
from "having to redistribute" AS701's traffic etc etc. Hope that makes
it more clear, but it is just my interpretation of someone elses work.
"sgorman1" == sgorman1 <sgorman1@gmu.edu> writes:
sgorman1> Homogenous, in this context, does not mean similar platform
sgorman1> connectivity, but nodes with same degree connecting to each
sgorman1> other.
Ah, that makes it more clear. So a full mesh would be better? 
sgorman1> Lots of problems in applying that to cascading failures in
sgorman1> reality - making AS701 disappear, BGP allowing a cascading
sgorman1> traffic failure from "having to redistribute" AS701's
sgorman1> traffic etc etc. Hope that makes it more clear, but it is
sgorman1> just my interpretation of someone elses work.
Yeah, I have all sorts of problems with applying this model to
reality. But then, we already determined that I was being stupid.
thanks,
Michael
> Homogenous, in this context, does not mean similar platform
> connectivity, but nodes with same degree connecting to each
> other.
Ah, that makes it more clear. So a full mesh would be better?
no, fine grained peering would be better.