Lixia Zhang allegedly wrote on 10/24/2009 1:20 AM: > Talking about Hiroshima: according to the RRG plan, the Hiroshima RRG > meeting will be focusing on the discussions of RRG recommendation to > IETF on scalable routing solutions. There is precisely two weeks before > Hiroshima now, lets get the discussion started on the list first. I'm > going through all the exchanges since Stockholm by subject groups, in an > attempt to make a summary. > > Lixia
Ah good. Here are some suggestions on what to tell the IETF: - How to think about routing architecture at all. We have a start on this in the draft recommendation, but it should be organized a little better I think. We've tried before, but I think the time is better now. I don't know how you want to discuss that. - Loc/ID separation is not directly routing's problem. The root cause, and the pivot point for a solution, is identification functions that use topology-dependent information as input. These functions are primarily in endpoints but are also in network infrastructure. They should be fixed, to the extent they reasonably can. Where they can't, then routing, mobility, etc. must take up the slack. The RRG recommends to the IETF that it needs to decide where that line is -- what identification functions will they assume will be fixed and which not -- so that other Internet technologies, particularly routing, can have a clearer idea what they have to do. - NAT is now architecture. The IETF needs to decide how much NAT it wants the Internet to have in the future. This strongly influences what we do in routing/addressing, because outlying, dwindling cases (either the NAT ones or the non-NAT ones) can be handled specially. I'll stop there for now. Thanks ... Scott _______________________________________________ rrg mailing list [email protected] http://www.irtf.org/mailman/listinfo/rrg
