On May 20, 2010, at 7:20 PM, [email protected] wrote:
In einer eMail vom 17.05.2010 20:39:49 Westeuropäische Sommerzeit
schreibt [email protected]:
I will NOT be modifying the statement wording during this poll.
(1) "The Internet continuing down the current architectural path,
whereby site multi-homing increases the size/entropy of
the DFZ RIB/FIB, is not believed to be scalable or viable."
(2) "The RG has rough consensus that separating identity from
location is desirable and technically feasible. However,
the RG does NOT have consensus on the best engineering
approach to such an identity/location split."
(3) "The RG has consensus that the Internet needs to support
multi-homing in a manner that scales well and does not have
prohibitive costs."
(4) "Any IETF solution to Internet scaling has to not only support
multi-homing, but address the real-world constraints of the
end customers (large and small)."
Ran,
What is the purpose, what is the intention of this poll?
I voted 4 times YES, including (4)"...but address the real world
constraints of the end customers (large and small)".
But I feel like being framed: When I address it, I get no response
at all.
I asked, do you hereby mean "must be DV-based or not". The response
is total silence (and no explanation why not-telling to have
reachability to XYZ guarantees that the (non-paying) customer won't
ask for forwarding his data to XYZ.
He said that he wanted people to evaluate each statement based only on
the text in the statement.
When I mentioned "mobility without the need of having a home agent",
again, I get only silence.
Wouldn't this be a major improvement ? For mobile users as well as
for mobile nodes ?
You want us to vote on your statements but you won't explain what
you have in mind and why objectives like I mentioned are not of
interest.
If you feel you don't understand the statement, or that it is
misleading, then IMO you should vote against.
Regards
Marshall
Heiner
_______________________________________________
rrg mailing list
[email protected]
http://www.irtf.org/mailman/listinfo/rrg
_______________________________________________
rrg mailing list
[email protected]
http://www.irtf.org/mailman/listinfo/rrg
