[arch-d] Fwd: A Public Option for the Core

John Day <jeanjour@comcast.net> Sun, 16 August 2020 10:18 UTC

Return-Path: <jeanjour@comcast.net>
X-Original-To: architecture-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: architecture-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E01803A0B36 for <architecture-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sun, 16 Aug 2020 03:18:56 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.097
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.097 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=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=comcast.net
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id M7RIETaDg_jk for <architecture-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sun, 16 Aug 2020 03:18:55 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from resqmta-ch2-03v.sys.comcast.net (resqmta-ch2-03v.sys.comcast.net [IPv6:2001:558:fe21:29:69:252:207:35]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 7CF693A0B35 for <architecture-discuss@ietf.org>; Sun, 16 Aug 2020 03:18:55 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from resomta-ch2-14v.sys.comcast.net ([]) by resqmta-ch2-03v.sys.comcast.net with ESMTP id 7FjukKRdudzWm7FkckLrN2; Sun, 16 Aug 2020 10:18:54 +0000
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=comcast.net; s=20190202a; t=1597573134; bh=ARU3/6NfUf+/UEGxfF9aS1Q5mXlXiS2L3iWhX+Od8wM=; h=Received:Received:From:Content-Type:Mime-Version:Subject: Message-Id:To:Date; b=CMcuBtn7isjtXpZ2c86DBL+G94tgLD9An++Idl5J5xry7tv8dr+R0+zL+fNtuwfVU 2xoVdgO/YR2AxXa/6qJdU81sFlIUEHBpZa9d03wzxK057G3DFJGSHk6InL9vyWEQs6 J9n7HEcMBpiU8HWC1WcEndynvA2lwtQado/lDjI05RWqhGUkULX604kSJgFXPl65lh efuZj/1J0M6YMtlGULxNEtLHb4wCTovr5rQ8MABk7X37FRicR532xOMZi+JgcfbOUE 5O6VBICDVkQXLGpMTs2Kz1QVEsSUbGDVHc7VdQrCBCOy5fWWfnv0yPMFFfS2tkYwH6 I2k3PL1x0tDdA==
Received: from [IPv6:2601:189:4300:cee9:dc0e:8ac8:fa2d:8901] ([IPv6:2601:189:4300:cee9:dc0e:8ac8:fa2d:8901]) by resomta-ch2-14v.sys.comcast.net with ESMTPSA id 7Fjpkv5kltNzu7FkPkmcKS; Sun, 16 Aug 2020 10:18:42 +0000
X-Xfinity-VMeta: sc=0.00;st=legit
From: John Day <jeanjour@comcast.net>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="Apple-Mail=_CE16C22F-720D-4148-93C2-75B8CFD081D8"
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 12.4 \(3445.104.15\))
Message-Id: <754DE168-DF3B-4471-A145-39C6143E538A@comcast.net>
References: <F9BA8A11-99AD-4899-AA85-B44B4DF86778@comcast.net>
To: architecture-discuss@ietf.org
Date: Sun, 16 Aug 2020 06:18:41 -0400
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3445.104.15)
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/architecture-discuss/uoKOanwkfG9C36ClGGVemRNqjX8>
Subject: [arch-d] Fwd: A Public Option for the Core
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: Sun, 16 Aug 2020 10:18:57 -0000

> Begin forwarded message:
> From: John Day <jeanjour@comcast.net>
> Subject: Re: [arch-d] A Public Option for the Core
> Date: August 16, 2020 at 06:18:04 EDT
> To: John Grant <j@ninetiles.com>
> No, that is not true.  Your first mistake is that there is a control plane.
> John
>> On Aug 16, 2020, at 06:02, John Grant <j@ninetiles.com> wrote:
>> On 16/08/2020 02:48, Joseph Touch wrote:
>>> *I* want apps to be able to get different service from the network and to pay differently for them if needed, but *never* to have the network infer or enforce that mapping.
>> Of course, if you're going to do that -- have the application negotiate a particular kind of service rather than have the network "inspect" the packets and guess what service is needed -- you need a control plane protocol (let's call it "signalling") to do the negotiation, and you no longer have the connectionless/stateless paradigm on which IP is founded.
>> -- 
>> John Grant
>> Nine Tiles, Cambridge, England
>> +44 1223 862599 and +44 1223 511455
>> http://www.ninetiles.com
>> _______________________________________________
>> Architecture-discuss mailing list
>> Architecture-discuss@ietf.org
>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/architecture-discuss