On Fri, Dec 4, 2009 at 6:34 AM, Scott Brim <[email protected]> wrote:

> Joel M. Halpern allegedly wrote on 12/03/2009 4:15 PM:
> > Part of my difficulty with the question is taht it presuppose that a
> > system problem can be reasonably addressed by a compartmented
> > recommendation.
>
> No.  I'm saying that routing doesn't care about identification
> functions.  Beyond that, there is the question of how to put the
> architecture of the Internet together, including all layers.  That is
> particularly not in the RRG's scope.
>
> What I would like to see in an RRG recommendation would be: In recent
> years the network layer has taken up the slack for architectural
> shortcomings in other layers, because we were good at doing so.  At this
> time (1) this burden is heavy on the neck of routing and addressing, and
> (2) architecture is being reviewed and revised at all layers.  It's an
> excellent opportunity.  From the point of view of the RRG, there are
> certain things which the IETF must do, particularly
>
>  - Stop identification functions from using topology-dependent
>    information in order to make selection of a robust, flexible routing
>    and addressing architecture easier.
>
>  - (Insert other MUSTs here.)
>
> Beyond that, the RRG recommends that the IETF explicitly decide how much
> the IETF wants to adjust upper layer architecture and how much the IETF
> wants to routing and addressing to compensate for lack of architectural
> correctness in the upper layers.  This will affect how the routing and
> addressing architecture evolves.
>
> See?
>

An excellent point.

-- 
Regards,

DY
http://cnu.kr/~dykim
_______________________________________________
rrg mailing list
[email protected]
http://www.irtf.org/mailman/listinfo/rrg

Reply via email to