Re: [arch-d] Updates on IAB mailing lists
Brian E Carpenter <brian.e.carpenter@gmail.com> Mon, 20 April 2020 21:10 UTC
Return-Path: <brian.e.carpenter@gmail.com>
X-Original-To: architecture-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: architecture-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B078A3A100D for <architecture-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 20 Apr 2020 14:10:41 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -0.198
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.198 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com
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 EzIa8jZhRJME for <architecture-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 20 Apr 2020 14:10:39 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-pg1-x541.google.com (mail-pg1-x541.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::541]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id A52F03A1003 for <architecture-discuss@ietf.org>; Mon, 20 Apr 2020 14:10:39 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-pg1-x541.google.com with SMTP id t11so5707950pgg.2 for <architecture-discuss@ietf.org>; Mon, 20 Apr 2020 14:10:39 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=subject:to:references:from:message-id:date:user-agent:mime-version :in-reply-to:content-language:content-transfer-encoding; bh=jM4R9R3cbeZ4fhKxZnoEt9OM2zyvMFc1JKFD71/9kSY=; b=PrNEUujl0M9kt/86vXy2nMKLXmypV8M+W195YdA0iQfJ1UkdJ7lWd27c5fXS6GzHNC 1ITFY+O2iDy/xL1pLHLxMwnt4cozNSjqparRfiL7/KWM+7UuOuSijlXnlpyuQRFyJOjt 7Z34k9YmLyIS61PJmtXmralEBkpUPMr+2hsw56FPcmWu3Xf8iilQd6sr2ZCppUlt7/ag 7LDdN+0fUuez1zYkrpecwkcKO8EHrVS+JgYwfVKuWy+7j77QIshnYtTUIhFIL0PmNTk/ uTRIhXFbf/D7TAwPe1Q7lu6z7wFd+HwR6+xLZMvvvhUl+ExiA/EmMJnzJJP4nHO+9kHD trIw==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:subject:to:references:from:message-id:date :user-agent:mime-version:in-reply-to:content-language :content-transfer-encoding; bh=jM4R9R3cbeZ4fhKxZnoEt9OM2zyvMFc1JKFD71/9kSY=; b=iHdB2Zi3d8eyvkf1fogluzqK79pTcupYCLzFwCIhdB69Ldype+AAzOfD1kvIuTAiyj RyK4yma6sny1eU8zaQfv/X5l/UWwsmsBSwXhIuPT558MR0M1ZJHLaeJAg5X1heQ578ZX 0mB0of1Tb7oLQwgs4ehI+z0hoOF2ZxQFpvBdjb3jcPyxzB9qSV9X100Rtu2eTXVR02uk OF43N60CqsVXSvOjuXgAAkundw0qWdXweWoG4gVwfE5kDbvkkZqSfIK5K05dS6yMgExy yu8LiaNJytQtrzv0v4TtzfiYOTQfcHRKgyaE6h8gvOq6K5Un8my6ISt+EuYjS+7SaV7M IACA==
X-Gm-Message-State: AGi0PubbzLzo2ls0Eqb1tVZMXELD9dIBn+eBIe7I1wdDtJss2BZhr5gQ 5srw0wPIR36Q79J+rEAH9aO0w/WGz/A=
X-Google-Smtp-Source: APiQypKzYBI7aO3hPILTEP0Hpro8ILN3ELG003RBe5gNKvjSvaUTTh6V2obHh1AM9YbgsTwydGbxVQ==
X-Received: by 2002:aa7:8259:: with SMTP id e25mr18450582pfn.82.1587417038525; Mon, 20 Apr 2020 14:10:38 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [192.168.178.30] ([165.84.25.143]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id e7sm402540pfh.161.2020.04.20.14.10.36 for <architecture-discuss@ietf.org> (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-ECDSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Mon, 20 Apr 2020 14:10:37 -0700 (PDT)
To: architecture-discuss@ietf.org
References: <303F494F-F06C-4E6A-99E5-089798EB56DB@apple.com> <F6BDA4C7-614B-4C0C-A00A-6B5056541B6E@tzi.org> <CAHBDyN5fsp1AdaGuonAccGReEgYy8e0gaFL=-KCzD7W=dtdVEg@mail.gmail.com> <CAHBDyN5LQFnf7e+G9X4M+9MM9wZGiZmtL7xjfD-tsy0wZR5nGA@mail.gmail.com>
From: Brian E Carpenter <brian.e.carpenter@gmail.com>
Message-ID: <3d509264-f9a5-0ed4-91de-c1a5e0155194@gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 21 Apr 2020 09:10:34 +1200
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; WOW64; rv:60.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/60.9.1
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <CAHBDyN5LQFnf7e+G9X4M+9MM9wZGiZmtL7xjfD-tsy0wZR5nGA@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-Language: en-US
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/architecture-discuss/RjvoJ3chJtdvc8AebOhKnG7_Eec>
Subject: Re: [arch-d] Updates on IAB mailing lists
X-BeenThere: architecture-discuss@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: open discussion forum for long/wide-range architectural issues <architecture-discuss.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/architecture-discuss>, <mailto:architecture-discuss-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/architecture-discuss/>
List-Post: <mailto:architecture-discuss@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:architecture-discuss-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/architecture-discuss>, <mailto:architecture-discuss-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 20 Apr 2020 21:10:42 -0000
On 21-Apr-20 07:34, Mary Barnes wrote: > Just to be clear, my point is that architecture-discuss was not intended to be an IAB discussion list any more than IETF discussion list is scoped to IESG discussion. Not quite accurate - see below. Especially "This is an IAB-sponsored activity...". Brian -------- Forwarded Message -------- Subject: New architecture-discuss mailing list forum Date: Mon, 17 Oct 2005 16:00:54 -0400 From: Leslie Daigle <leslie@thinkingcat.com> To: IETF Announcement list <ietf-announce@ietf.org> CC: iab@ietf.org, iesg@ietf.org, architecture-discuss@ietf.org A new mailing list has been created to provide a forum for general discussion of Internet architectural issues: architecture-discuss@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/architecture-discuss The architecture-discuss list serves as a technical discussion forum for all members of the IETF community that are interested in larger architectural issues. It is meant to be an open discussion forum for all long and/or wide range architectural concerns related to the Internet Architecture. In particular, it may be used to discuss and bring forth different points of view on controversial architectural questions. Discussions that drill down and dwell on specifics of individual protocols or technologies are to be discouraged, redirected to appropriate other fora, or re-cast to discussions of broader implications for Internet architecture. This is an IAB-sponsored activity, but IAB members will be participating as individuals and not representatives of the IAB. As such, postings to list must not be considered as IAB opinion, and must not be quoted as such. Indeed, it is expected that IAB members will disagree with each other, at least occasionally, just like the any part of this community. :-) Note that questions asking for an official IAB opinion, issues requiring immediate action (by anyone), issues related to the way the IETF operates, do not belong on this list. Issues pertaining to IAB business should still be directed to iab@iab.org . Leslie Daigle, for the IAB. ------------------------ [Some examples of potential topics for discussion, provided by Pekka Nikkander] 1. Mobility and multi-homing The IETF currently hosts a bunch of working groups focusing on various aspects of mobility and multi homing. At the Internet Area, there are five WGs and a couple of almost-WGs charted for standards track work: MIP4, MIP6, NEMO, SHIM6, MONAMI6, and NETLMM. In addition to those, there are experimental approaches, such as HIP, and optimisations, such as MIPSHOP and MOBOPTS. Outside of the Internet area, MOBIKE is focusing on mobility and multi-homing for IPsec and SCTP and DCCP folks have had their mobility and multi- homing discussions. The wider research community is full of various proposals, including overlay approaches (such as i3) and underlay approaches (such as using MPLS tunnels to implement host routes). Given this multitude of work and even partially overlapping standards track solutions, what would be the right way or right ways forward? Could we design a way towards converging solutions? How do we ensure robustness of solutions if we attempt to deploy multiple solutions at the same time; for example, SHIM6 + Mobile IPv6 + SHIM6? How do more unified solutions, like using CGA-based mobility with SHIM6 contrast to this? What about using HIP with routable IP addresses instead of Host Identity Tags (HITs) as Upper Layer Identifiers? Going a little bit furthermore, what are the architectural impacts of doing mobility and multi-homing at the IP layer vs. other layers? 2. IP virtualisation In the recent discussion w.r.t. tunnelling at the Internet Area list, a clear need for virtualisation came up. While tunnelling with clear implementation-level virtualisation boundaries is clearly one viable way to implement virtual IP networks on the top of the "real" IP infrastructure, this issue seems to warrant some deeper digging. Tunnelling has well known drawbacks, and we may want to ask what would be the alternatives. In order to understand alternatives, if any, we need to understand better the requirements behind IP virtualisation, or what people *really* want to achieve with it. Is it merely ease of configuration, or reduced operational costs? If so, could there be other architectural ways of achieving the same ease or perhaps even larger capital and operational savings? Some people have been promoting adding "realms" as a first class service to the base IP. Would that provide an alternative solution? While the mobility and multi-homing discussion seems to more circle around evaluating existing proposals and trying to navigate towards more unified solutions, here we seem to lack genuine alternatives and deep understanding of the real problem domain. 3. Overall open architectural issues Some IAB members have been collecting open architectural issues for a while, with the intention of bringing up an up to date collection of information at a later date, probably in a form of a WikiPedia-like web site. This work is going on, and we'd like to get as much information as possible from the wider community. Hence, suggestions on what are the more pressing longer-term open issues are very welcome. To given an idea of the current issues so far identified, here is a partial list. The list doesn't say much without explanation, but it may give an idea of the type of issues we are looking at. End-to-end connectivity ======================= The original value of the Internet, the ability to connect to any host with any protocol, has eroded away during the last decade. While it is impossible to get back to the original mode of operation, largely due to security reasons, some form of better-than-today end- to-end connectivity would be very valuable. o Living with NATs, filters, and firewalls o Introducing identity realms or domains o Evolving the application interface (API) End-user experience =================== o Transparent security o Zero Configuration and Service Discovery Balancing Accessibility, Security, and Privacy ============================================== o System for plausible sender identity for received packets o Secure self-configuration o Integrating security across the stack o Dealing with bad traffic _______________________________________________ IETF-Announce mailing list IETF-Announce@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf-announce
- [arch-d] Updates on IAB mailing lists Tommy Pauly
- Re: [arch-d] Updates on IAB mailing lists Carsten Bormann
- Re: [arch-d] Updates on IAB mailing lists Mary Barnes
- Re: [arch-d] Updates on IAB mailing lists Mary Barnes
- Re: [arch-d] Updates on IAB mailing lists Mirja Kuehlewind
- Re: [arch-d] Updates on IAB mailing lists Carsten Bormann
- Re: [arch-d] Updates on IAB mailing lists S Moonesamy
- Re: [arch-d] Updates on IAB mailing lists Tommy Pauly
- Re: [arch-d] Updates on IAB mailing lists Brian E Carpenter
- Re: [arch-d] Updates on IAB mailing lists S Moonesamy
- Re: [arch-d] Updates on IAB mailing lists Mary Barnes
- Re: [arch-d] Updates on IAB mailing lists John C Klensin
- Re: [arch-d] Updates on IAB mailing lists Stephen Farrell
- Re: [arch-d] Updates on IAB mailing lists S Moonesamy
- Re: [arch-d] Updates on IAB mailing lists Christopher Wood
- Re: [arch-d] Updates on IAB mailing lists Bob Hinden