This message appears not to have made it to the mailing list archives. Retransmitting.
Tony Begin forwarded message: > From: Tony Li <[email protected]> > Date: November 5, 2010 3:15:50 PM GMT+08:00 > To: <[email protected]> > <[email protected]> > Cc: [email protected] > Subject: Re: Comments about draft-irtf-rrg-design-goals-03 > > > Hi all, > > In looking at the changes that Mohamed has proposed, I wanted to run some of > them past the group. > > Proposed text: > > It is commonly recognized that the Internet routing and addressing > architecture is facing challenges which may question the sustainability > of > the Internet. Examples of these challenges are scalability, mobility, > multi-homing, and inbound inter-domain traffic engineering. > > Are folks comfortable with this language? I'm concerned that it may be seen > as inflammatory. > > MB: What about reducing the message churn ? > > The churn is much more of a BGP protocol issue, not a routing architecture > issue. > > MB: Not only inter-domain. In some deployment, intra domains routes are > bigger than the inter-domain one. Yes, it is the case! > > Perhaps, but if it's intra-domain it's definitely not an architectural > problem. > > MB: Precise inbound TE is more problematic that outbound one. > > What are folks doing to address outbound TE? I assume there are fun and > games with local pref. > > MB: I don’t think any solution can claim it can be scalable if PI are > assigned. This is not an achievable goal IMHO without concrete actions from > registries. > > I tend to agree until demonstrated otherwise. ;-) I agree that registries > will have to be involved, but we also have to put an architecture in place so > that they can offer a reasonable alternative to PI. > > MB: What means « scalable » in the context of mobility? This is not > elaborated in the text. > > I consider scalability to be a constant, regardless of the context. This is > simply a restriction. It implies that the mobility solution can't do > something as drastic as creating inter-domain host routes. > > MB: I don’t get the point of this section. > > Actually, we're rewritten this because others didn't get it either. Please > review the most recent draft. > > Tony > _______________________________________________ rrg mailing list [email protected] http://www.irtf.org/mailman/listinfo/rrg
