Re: [Banana] 答复: diff (banana load distribution, next-hop selection of multipath)

Jim Reid <jim@rfc1035.com> Mon, 13 February 2017 09:32 UTC

Return-Path: <jim@rfc1035.com>
X-Original-To: banana@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: banana@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 59029127076 for <banana@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 13 Feb 2017 01:32:09 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.9
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.9 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
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 3nyG76EMBDN1 for <banana@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 13 Feb 2017 01:32:08 -0800 (PST)
Received: from shaun.rfc1035.com (shaun.rfc1035.com [93.186.33.42]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 53764126FDC for <banana@ietf.org>; Mon, 13 Feb 2017 01:32:08 -0800 (PST)
Received: from gromit.rfc1035.com (gromit.rfc1035.com [195.54.233.69]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by shaun.rfc1035.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 3B3C4242125A; Mon, 13 Feb 2017 09:32:06 +0000 (UTC)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 9.3 \(3124\))
From: Jim Reid <jim@rfc1035.com>
In-Reply-To: <4AD902A48032F745A3D7866E6CAE8CB064BBD532@DGGEMM521-MBX.china.huawei.com>
Date: Mon, 13 Feb 2017 09:32:05 +0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-Id: <E26769A7-8B3A-4D8B-8828-93F9E596B03C@rfc1035.com>
References: <4552F0907735844E9204A62BBDD325E7A6386E6A@NKGEML515-MBX.china.huawei.com> <C328BFD1-A2B7-4E95-956A-D553A8167922@gmail.com> <f5bc7430-45dd-c5a6-d376-9d349d40a373@isi.edu> <4552F0907735844E9204A62BBDD325E7A63A1C49@NKGEML515-MBX.china.huawei.com> <99F04B22-01AC-476C-A15A-1696B686A953@isi.edu> <4552F0907735844E9204A62BBDD325E7A63A1D7D@NKGEML515-MBX.china.huawei.com> <9c6339a0-be7a-5b26-acc8-b8b13108eeca@isi.edu> <956518A5-6371-4959-BBB8-1C4B9604DA0D@gmail.com> <E5EB799F-F922-4AB3-A77D-E8EFF1866A2E@gmail.com> <4AD902A48032F745A3D7866E6CAE8CB064BBD1D8@DGGEMM521-MBX.china.huawei.com> <029e994f-e5e8-08a2-6015-eb8dd2d692fb@isi.edu> <4AD902A48032F745A3D7866E6CAE8CB064BBD532@DGGEMM521-MBX.china.huawei.com>
To: "Zuojing (2012 Laboratories)" <jing.zuo@huawei.com>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3124)
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/banana/IFhbBTwXcUh0zghxY9LnopRpBGA>
Cc: Mingui Zhang <zhangmingui@huawei.com>, Margaret Cullen <margaretw42@gmail.com>, BANANA WG/BoF <banana@ietf.org>, Joe Touch <touch@isi.edu>
Subject: Re: [Banana] 答复: diff (banana load distribution, next-hop selection of multipath)
X-BeenThere: banana@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17
Precedence: list
List-Id: "Bandwidth Aggregation for interNet Access: Discussion of bandwidth aggregation solutions based on IETF technologies." <banana.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/banana>, <mailto:banana-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/banana/>
List-Post: <mailto:banana@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:banana-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/banana>, <mailto:banana-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 13 Feb 2017 09:32:09 -0000

> On 13 Feb 2017, at 09:23, Zuojing (2012 Laboratories) <jing.zuo@huawei.com> wrote:
> 
> BANANA needs not to distinguish subflows from TCP flows only if Service Providers require BANANA boxes to do such exemption For example, Service Providers may purposely let those flows already being conducted by other multipath technologies be “bypassed”. 

Surely these sorts of issues are for the WG to discuss once it has been created? They shouldn’t be relevant to the matter at hand, namely the new WG’s charter.