IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [Coin] Semantic Routing discussions from the interim meeting

Adrian Farrel <adrian@olddog.co.uk> Mon, 28 February 2022 16:24 UTC

Return-Path: <adrian@olddog.co.uk>
X-Original-To: coin@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: coin@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 84DC23A1479 for <coin@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 28 Feb 2022 08:24:57 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.905
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.905 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_BLOCKED=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_NONE=0.001, T_SCC_BODY_TEXT_LINE=-0.01, 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 R4EuTQRuq1A5 for <coin@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 28 Feb 2022 08:24:53 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mta5.iomartmail.com (mta5.iomartmail.com [62.128.193.155]) (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 535893A136B for <coin@irtf.org>; Mon, 28 Feb 2022 08:24:45 -0800 (PST)
Received: from vs1.iomartmail.com (vs1.iomartmail.com [10.12.10.121]) by mta5.iomartmail.com (8.14.7/8.14.7) with ESMTP id 21SGOg4D032570; Mon, 28 Feb 2022 16:24:42 GMT
Received: from vs1.iomartmail.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by IMSVA (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8A18F4604B; Mon, 28 Feb 2022 16:24:42 +0000 (GMT)
Received: from vs1.iomartmail.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by IMSVA (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7C7AA4603D; Mon, 28 Feb 2022 16:24:42 +0000 (GMT)
Received: from asmtp3.iomartmail.com (unknown [10.12.10.224]) by vs1.iomartmail.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS; Mon, 28 Feb 2022 16:24:42 +0000 (GMT)
Received: from LAPTOPK7AS653V ([148.252.133.209]) (authenticated bits=0) by asmtp3.iomartmail.com (8.14.7/8.14.7) with ESMTP id 21SGOdas025076 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NO); Mon, 28 Feb 2022 16:24:41 GMT
Reply-To: <adrian@olddog.co.uk>
From: "Adrian Farrel" <adrian@olddog.co.uk>
To: "'Marie-Jose Montpetit'" <marie@mjmontpetit.com>, <coin@irtf.org>
References: <06b601d82cba$3fef3490$bfcd9db0$@olddog.co.uk> <CAPjWiCRzFF=iatmvnuH8iXqSy=yTsZvR9xLKRS-wjN6=LwWYRw@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CAPjWiCRzFF=iatmvnuH8iXqSy=yTsZvR9xLKRS-wjN6=LwWYRw@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 28 Feb 2022 16:24:40 -0000
Organization: Old Dog Consulting
Message-ID: <06de01d82cbf$b0f6ce50$12e46af0$@olddog.co.uk>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_06DF_01D82CBF.B0F76A90"
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook 16.0
Thread-Index: AQHzYXAWQdfYH3r+y6PyxW8tB1d2uALHyoi1rFx7YqA=
Content-Language: en-gb
X-Originating-IP: 148.252.133.209
X-Thinkmail-Auth: adrian@olddog.co.uk
X-TM-AS-GCONF: 00
X-TM-AS-Product-Ver: IMSVA-9.1.0.2090-8.6.0.1018-26744.001
X-TM-AS-Result: No--24.344-10.0-31-10
X-imss-scan-details: No--24.344-10.0-31-10
X-TMASE-Version: IMSVA-9.1.0.2090-8.6.1018-26744.001
X-TMASE-Result: 10--24.344200-10.000000
X-TMASE-MatchedRID: pS5owHKhBO3xIbpQ8BhdbPHkpkyUphL9T5ysQDj6eFm2HpC95B+yozt4 oEU19f2KUZULkzHgpeZcQvB8LggOFATRU29JKSly36lQXQeyPFFUmOV/rCMpB1c/CedjlcvkUCQ uDvGEd6OcXawVSOT/YbNbMHrbVKaCyCxFBMsQ7UD+xRIVoKNMvPtiJd16CCrJNicYKk+uuBJphV 2xdYJahZY9KKo39qPaUPQLSVfnujCXyq4eIpVGhyhvVjkRcuKhNUSduuqYHDvIgofMgahPrcd42 TTaKPtTTQPMqkJM2T6n18Do/dZd91eh3E8YtVNy5jpYq8oRllNZDdHiTk9OcNuGPYJMWGhA7Mc1 WxqLI0S9tCJxcI2SJO74hCpKBA1eaGovhGLzN5ZDRebSlZYuSh6OXxdRGLx8e3wXTvBMUi5Lmdv YEvtJ1cjfwPq/iqzrnvzLORC6qBA2UEKHDN0wzCsIuzCLc2mNVlYUFBrX418nIXwGgysI0O//vb MLiEkVWFQNk4+HCoigfHz5rL2UAtQGnHQKZS9z5p1ddw6V4Rtd5/m3qrxFzEqa6TyhyXvPOCjyk McvhP4LwTxkKC1upQ1qNf7wRfPFzNED3WLmJvd3IYxRexpgAH6QBxLSLncwnC4ECPrC6Ehs00ZQ xlNz83Im7RcPYNcSVwexOucUltw+MZxonH7QAZpg8IOIewHQuKAG4OMlyf+OHxbnkniIp3XqhK5 FYYDpEltmTBYDkdh3/qnzWxv5YBABxAdjh0IaL4+sB3yBsclVx1Cg15eisCtwWBGVoxmpU2riLh 6qdk9bp+SAhsFighQAXi4Ga9GRHxPMjOKY7A+DGx/OQ1GV8gM5kYUazKEVsOzOncrmCoMCpgETe T0ynA==
X-TMASE-SNAP-Result: 1.821001.0001-0-1-22:0,33:0,34:0-0
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/coin/MlYdIdKP2VSCgstlLEXVXdPMv3I>
Subject: Re: [Coin] Semantic Routing discussions from the interim meeting
X-BeenThere: coin@irtf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: "COIN: Computing in the Network" <coin.irtf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.irtf.org/mailman/options/coin>, <mailto:coin-request@irtf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/coin/>
List-Post: <mailto:coin@irtf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:coin-request@irtf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.irtf.org/mailman/listinfo/coin>, <mailto:coin-request@irtf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 28 Feb 2022 16:25:05 -0000

> You are obviously missing the routing discussion start spilled over.

 

That’s funny, Marie-Jose.

I’m not obviously missing anything.

There is precisely one email in the archive (today, Toerless) that is the spill-over of the discussion on arch-d and in ICNRG about “recasting address semantics”.

In the meantime, the COIN list has been quiet with just 3 emails in the last week, and most of the recent emails related to administration of the meeting in March.

 

> I think all the questions are somewhat summarized under: how does

> (semantic) routing relates to COIN.

 

Yes. Exactly.

And we have been here before.

You have said that the charter is broad enough and open enough to discuss semantic routing. And I’m glad of that.

But, in an attempt to understand whether all or part of semantic routing fits in scope for COIN (“relates to COIN”) the best approach for me is to present the work and the questions and let others tell me “no, that is not in scope” or “yes, continue that discussion.” I’m happy to hear either answer, but not to be told “show me how that is in scope for COIN.” (I can explain why I won’t be happy with that response if it isn’t obvious.)

 

So I’ll push on.

 

Cheers,

Adrian


From: Adrian Farrel  <mailto:adrian@olddog.co.uk> <adrian@olddog.co.uk>
Reply: adrian@olddog.co.uk <mailto:adrian@olddog.co.uk>   <mailto:adrian@olddog.co.uk> <adrian@olddog.co.uk>
Date: February 28, 2022 at 10:46:47 AM
To: coin@irtf.org <mailto:coin@irtf.org>   <mailto:coin@irtf.org> <coin@irtf.org>
Subject:  [Coin] Semantic Routing discussions from the interim meeting 





Hi COIN, 

I left a bit of a gap after the interim so as to not be the only person 
spamming the list, but since things are quiet, I thought it might be helpful 
to pick up some of the discussions from the chat window during the interim. 

Thanks for a lively discussion, and sorry that the presentation was 
wide-ranging and didn't go into the details of "what is Semantic Routing". 
That was at least in part because you can read the drafts and also the 
threads on this list. (I know, so much nicer to be spoon-fed, but we should 
try to keep moving forward and not repeat stuff :-) 

I'm going to pull out a couple of separate threads to try to get to the 
points raised: 

1. What is the problem you are trying to solve, and what is the solution you 
have in mind? 

2. Where to draw the lines. Where is the line between network programming 
and data plane programmability? Where is the line between forwarding and 
routing? Isn't this "just labelling traffic"? 

3. Where is the abstract definition? What is the architectural formulation? 

Please bring up again what you typed in the chat if you want to, and then we 
can try to move the discussion forward. 

Best, 
Adrian 

-- 
Coin mailing list 
Coin@irtf.org <mailto:Coin@irtf.org>  
https://www.irtf.org/mailman/listinfo/coin

v2.8.7 | Report a Bug | By Email