I believe in one thing... simplicity must always occur as a result of addressing and hiding complexity, there is no free lunch as they say, simplicity in itself without someone somewhere identifying, addressing and hiding for the clients, the complexity...well simply will have true little true value addition is what i feel...simplicity is for the users complexity is for the designers....the more the complexity is identified and addressed, the more the world will enjoy simplicity as a result.... Sitaraman > [not sure which lists you were trying to post to, so I added s...@irtf.org] > > > I'll just note here as a general comment that part of the success (and > really, beauty) of the IP architecture is its inherent simplicity. If > SDN becomes a dumping ground for *gratuitous* complexity (as we are > currently seeing in many venues) then it will fail. > > --dmm > > > On Fri, Jan 25, 2013 at 10:08 AM, <sitara...@nmsworks.co.in> wrote: >> We had Vint Cerf himself visit and talk to us today evening. >> Amongst others, he highlighted to us Openflow and SDN allowing routing >> based on content in addition to headers. >> My immediate reaction was question that this being an antithesis to >> standardization.....then Vint mentioned an example about routing based >> on >> charactersitics of the data and routers selectively choosing to listen >> (per my understanding of what Vint said, not certain i got it entirely.) >> Could we say that the conventional protocols are more leaning towards >> syntactic standardization (Bits in header fields have tightly defined >> ranges and constructs). >> Has Semantic standardization, pattern matching been done before at >> IETF/IRTF? >> Any relationship to Ontologies? >> ARe the implications to correctness, convergence, routing loops and >> such >> of algorithms in this context been formally studied? >> Would it make sense to start halfway and have two header components, >> one >> decided by the protocol and the other header components contents decided >> by the application itself (this will form a special part of the data). >> yet this part of the data being in a well defined restricted area of the >> data..is this beginning to look like optical network framing where frame >> at one layer is data for the other? Combine this with NMS based routing, >> (decoupled control of SDN) SDN is beginning to get a lot of the >> charactersitics of Optical then? >> Sitaraman >> >> >> -- >> This message has been scanned for viruses and >> dangerous content by MailScanner, and is >> believed to be clean. >> >> _______________________________________________ >> openflow-discuss mailing list >> openflow-discuss@lists.stanford.edu >> https://mailman.stanford.edu/mailman/listinfo/openflow-discuss > > -- > This message has been scanned for viruses and > dangerous content by MailScanner, and is > believed to be clean. >
-- This message has been scanned for viruses and dangerous content by MailScanner, and is believed to be clean. _______________________________________________ openflow-discuss mailing list openflow-discuss@lists.stanford.edu https://mailman.stanford.edu/mailman/listinfo/openflow-discuss
