IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [Anima] [homenet] ANIMA scope + homenet interaction + charter v15

Ralph Droms <rdroms.ietf@gmail.com> Fri, 31 October 2014 23:28 UTC

Return-Path: <rdroms.ietf@gmail.com>
X-Original-To: anima@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: anima@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0F0211A873E; Fri, 31 Oct 2014 16:28:51 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id vSntgL-SJRuD; Fri, 31 Oct 2014 16:28:49 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-qa0-x22e.google.com (mail-qa0-x22e.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:400d:c00::22e]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 45BEF1A873D; Fri, 31 Oct 2014 16:28:49 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-qa0-f46.google.com with SMTP id n8so2461249qaq.33 for <multiple recipients>; Fri, 31 Oct 2014 16:28:48 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=content-type:mime-version:subject:from:in-reply-to:date:cc :content-transfer-encoding:message-id:references:to; bh=gYduyWmHY2XuICC81TSO3jSI08C3rIjK7AFyZcUBAX4=; b=cX33MNGCJhncOYUekhQcty4XFHObYjcl6XgOjKktRjux+fugoUkAz+6zUN1Dh6oziZ vX+WHtyk6ZUFPUbpKLZgqR1PNr+eEsJ/D/r6buO51uaHlKXVV/6uJwjb9XCzmKmG5yxJ aOBVUeuwHJL5WScA4qb5M0F9qI9ZmU2TKezkJRvkojzNnKazGH933F5Pob1xOv/1DHpT /8V5u31W1+n+L6yBlLDTQOgZGskpHNa2c+JNU+X9h1oAuAxNB5UujphYe1nJo4iltAeS tqMOP+rKAL0WwB17GCJy4g3gbxk9bXMx5nWTDzBcGcglFcm+UQ7a8gXluLvU/USsCLyb PNDw==
X-Received: by 10.140.101.145 with SMTP id u17mr13294790qge.84.1414798128456; Fri, 31 Oct 2014 16:28:48 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [192.168.1.126] (c-75-69-243-247.hsd1.ma.comcast.net. [75.69.243.247]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPSA id l2sm10608749qao.34.2014.10.31.16.28.47 for <multiple recipients> (version=TLSv1 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA bits=128/128); Fri, 31 Oct 2014 16:28:47 -0700 (PDT)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Mime-Version: 1.0 (1.0)
From: Ralph Droms <rdroms.ietf@gmail.com>
X-Mailer: iPad Mail (12A405)
In-Reply-To: <6AD5ADBE-649C-4E30-B2DE-2FE95EEB5112@fugue.com>
Date: Fri, 31 Oct 2014 19:28:46 -0400
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-Id: <9D2D95EC-61CE-48A0-8196-4563E65F963C@gmail.com>
References: <544FF8FC.5090103@cisco.com> <95338658-B4F2-4634-AC7B-7B893C4DEF2E@iki.fi> <5D36713D8A4E7348A7E10DF7437A4B923AF6C46E@nkgeml512-mbx.china.huawei.com> <DEB8F897-3CED-4C59-BEBF-BF64096282F2@fugue.com> <5D36713D8A4E7348A7E10DF7437A4B923AF6C7AE@nkgeml512-mbx.china.huawei.com> <8490A544-45A9-45D2-9C98-D3CBEB28651D@fugue.com> <5D36713D8A4E7348A7E10DF7437A4B923AF6C8A9@nkgeml512-mbx.china.huawei.com> <E597E398-6AFB-4355-B2C4-8559D19A6AF0@fugue.com> <5453E246.9000705@gmail.com> <6AD5ADBE-649C-4E30-B2DE-2FE95EEB5112@fugue.com>
To: Ted Lemon <mellon@fugue.com>
Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/anima/jEGlK8yeCMJ5zOrpAkWX_wApF5s
Cc: Markus Stenberg <markus.stenberg@iki.fi>, Benoit Claise <bclaise@cisco.com>, "homenet@ietf.org" <homenet@ietf.org>, "anima@ietf.org" <anima@ietf.org>, Sheng Jiang <jiangsheng@huawei.com>
Subject: Re: [Anima] [homenet] ANIMA scope + homenet interaction + charter v15
X-BeenThere: anima@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
List-Id: Autonomic Networking Integrated Model and Approach <anima.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/anima>, <mailto:anima-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/anima/>
List-Post: <mailto:anima@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:anima-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/anima>, <mailto:anima-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 31 Oct 2014 23:28:51 -0000




> On Oct 31, 2014, at 4:04 PM, Ted Lemon <mellon@fugue.com> wrote:
> 
>> On Oct 31, 2014, at 3:25 PM, Brian E Carpenter <brian.e.carpenter@gmail.com> wrote:
>> Well yes. That's exactly why in autonomic management of prefixes,
>> we need peer to peer negotiation, as in "I need 3 /64s that I
>> don't have, do you have any spare ones for me?" Maybe it's
>> badly explained but that is the whole point of our use case.
> 
> Sure, you can approach it as a sort of flood fill algorithm that tries to optimize for route aggregation, but copes if that optimization doesn't pan out.
> 
Do we have use cases in which the number of links is so large that unaggregated routing tables will be a problem?

- Ralph

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email