[grobj] Referrals problem statement at IETF 79

Brian E Carpenter <brian.e.carpenter@gmail.com> Tue, 09 November 2010 10:07 UTC

Return-Path: <brian.e.carpenter@gmail.com>
X-Original-To: grobj@core3.amsl.com
Delivered-To: grobj@core3.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 024B93A6987 for <grobj@core3.amsl.com>; Tue, 9 Nov 2010 02:07:03 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -102.524
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-102.524 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.075, BAYES_00=-2.599, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id dxHykz7x0tbn for <grobj@core3.amsl.com>; Tue, 9 Nov 2010 02:07:02 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail-yx0-f172.google.com (mail-yx0-f172.google.com [209.85.213.172]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 15F3C3A6967 for <grobj@ietf.org>; Tue, 9 Nov 2010 02:07:02 -0800 (PST)
Received: by yxp4 with SMTP id 4so4476774yxp.31 for <grobj@ietf.org>; Tue, 09 Nov 2010 02:07:25 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:received:received:message-id:date:from :organization:user-agent:mime-version:to:subject:content-type :content-transfer-encoding; bh=tbMQ67XsU1Bx/vtkJ2iyBtBn0V2FUpmOK1BYfrMIjRU=; b=j8QCXqPB4OLyK9iHi7PlrX9hAjByKXi3+kSupYzyvo3grvz0nLYz7Lf12/oVwgYC8I EtwYrIHq3E84PyQ8c4akI7mw5w+NJ8ghQZCOWAIGhmOqkvOBA+HocfNFux4NOxRwQG9/ UNXi7VZEsTyoCRWrvr5Z03N3sVlxLfaB0/tUo=
DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=message-id:date:from:organization:user-agent:mime-version:to :subject:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; b=MrUjPmnLhpbGnDRj1sP1FHux+Wx+T0NsNtJqkMU08Nk0v7OwWlr74dKs+Wq2ZCZdMQ iqEcVNPLO5L7xlmoSmgp/B43id6QX0XUt7BD5H1taJgylSu4qm8hnkoC7oQLnWspcUKP XLYR3GazLcoePKHcL/t8c5Q2INjxGlQgSKeZQ=
Received: by 10.150.215.20 with SMTP id n20mr10449516ybg.97.1289297245659; Tue, 09 Nov 2010 02:07:25 -0800 (PST)
Received: from [130.129.35.35] (dhcp-2323.meeting.ietf.org [130.129.35.35]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id j64sm779986yha.24.2010.11.09.02.07.24 (version=SSLv3 cipher=RC4-MD5); Tue, 09 Nov 2010 02:07:25 -0800 (PST)
Message-ID: <4CD91D58.8010608@gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 09 Nov 2010 23:07:20 +1300
From: Brian E Carpenter <brian.e.carpenter@gmail.com>
Organization: University of Auckland
User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.6 (Windows/20070728)
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: grobj@ietf.org
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Subject: [grobj] Referrals problem statement at IETF 79
X-BeenThere: grobj@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
List-Id: Discuss Generic Referral Objects <grobj.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/grobj>, <mailto:grobj-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/grobj>
List-Post: <mailto:grobj@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:grobj-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/grobj>, <mailto:grobj-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 09 Nov 2010 10:07:03 -0000

I presented the draft Problem Statement for Referral
<draft-carpenter-referral-ps-01.txt> by myself, Sheng Jiang, and
Bo Zhou (departing author) and Zhen Cao (new author, ChinaMobile),
three times: in the two open meetings for the Applications and
Transport Areas, and in the Name Based Sockets (NBS) BOF.

There was significant interest and feedback in the APPAREA meeting,
with comments that we had identified an important problem but perhaps
not the correct direction for a solution. There was feedback that
applications people also want a solution to the path selection problem
(in other words, the network layer should fix the mess it's made over
the last 15 years with NATs and two versions of IP).

In the TSVAREA meeting, there was some positive discussion and agreement
that the problem statement should be further developed.

There was less feedback in the NBS BOF. It seems to me that the NBS
proposers are understimating the issues that they face once referral
and separate addressing scopes are present. But there is a similar
message that connectivity should be provided by some code under the
application layer, not by heuristics in every separate application.

I hope that some people from those three audiences will join
the discussion of the problem statement here.

-- 
Regards
   Brian Carpenter