Well, you haven't been paying attention, because I've presented "provider-internal aggregation based on geography" at two different RIPE meetings a while ago.
The only thing I got was perplexed stares.
If your presentation was as cursory as the slides I saw on the web, I'm not surprised that you got perplexed stares. I think that people need to be led through the concept step by step in more detail. Also, you need to deal with existing prejudices. Most people have preconcieved notions about geographical addressing which boils down to geo = bad. They either think it is some flaky idea about encoding physical coordinates in addressing, or some idea about giving nation states control over addressing or something that was rejected by the IETF in the past and therefore cannot be retrofitted in the IPv6 protocol. It is a big job to get past these prejudices and get people to actually think about things. The root of the idea is for the RIRs to cooperate in allocating IP addresses so that they can be aggregated more widely. In other words, so that it is not necessary for every allocation to become an announcement in the global routing table. Of course, this means that RIRs and ISPs have to cooperate in allocating IPv6 addresses using a rough kind of geographical plan. I suggest that this plan be anchored to the major cities where most interconnecting is done. This is also roughly aligned with the topology of the network if you can manage to visualize an entire city (Paris, London, Hannover, Krivoy Rog) as a single node in a network. It's that level of abstraction that leads to making sense of this kind of aggregation. As you pointed out in the slides, it is not necessary for interconnect to happen in a specific geographical location in order to gain some benefit from this. Of course, one would hope that eventually every ISP will migrate to interconnecting in each city where they carry traffic, but that is not a precondition. I have taken to calling this kind of thing "geotop" addressing because it comes from noticing that there is a "rough" alignment between geography and topology. I think we should leverage that rough alignment to dampen routing table growth, and therefore buy time in the same way that we bought time with CIDR and dampening of growth in IP address allocation. --Michael Dillon