Re: [homenet] draft-boutier-homenet-source-specific-routing-00

Juliusz Chroboczek <jch@pps.univ-paris-diderot.fr> Tue, 09 July 2013 15:03 UTC

Return-Path: <jch@pps.univ-paris-diderot.fr>
X-Original-To: homenet@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: homenet@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6B12711E8135 for <homenet@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 9 Jul 2013 08:03:47 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.249
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.249 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.000, BAYES_00=-2.599, HELO_EQ_FR=0.35]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 5hW8E2ezwV1V for <homenet@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 9 Jul 2013 08:03:41 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from potemkin.univ-paris7.fr (potemkin.univ-paris7.fr [IPv6:2001:660:3301:8000::1:1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 654E921F9EA3 for <homenet@ietf.org>; Tue, 9 Jul 2013 08:03:41 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr (mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr [81.194.30.253]) by potemkin.univ-paris7.fr (8.14.4/8.14.4/relay2/38117) with ESMTP id r69F3eOK027219; Tue, 9 Jul 2013 17:03:40 +0200
Received: from mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4C7E24FAC5; Tue, 9 Jul 2013 17:03:40 +0200 (CEST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at math.univ-paris-diderot.fr
Received: from mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr ([127.0.0.1]) by mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr (mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10023) with ESMTP id 2YiRWZhvgf7m; Tue, 9 Jul 2013 17:03:39 +0200 (CEST)
Received: from pirx.pps.jussieu.fr (bob75-6-82-238-73-9.fbx.proxad.net [82.238.73.9]) (Authenticated sender: jch) by mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 07CA24FABE; Tue, 9 Jul 2013 17:03:38 +0200 (CEST)
Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=pirx.pps.jussieu.fr) by pirx.pps.jussieu.fr with esmtp (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from <jch@pps.univ-paris-diderot.fr>) id 1UwZS6-0001Da-Hw; Tue, 09 Jul 2013 17:03:38 +0200
Date: Tue, 09 Jul 2013 17:03:38 +0200
Message-ID: <878v1fwzat.wl%jch@pps.univ-paris-diderot.fr>
From: Juliusz Chroboczek <jch@pps.univ-paris-diderot.fr>
To: Erik Kline <ek@google.com>
In-Reply-To: <CAAedzxrV=DZ5dAFizxSTGaZba=KUit59p6uaBZq+2TfMquMRJg@mail.gmail.com>
References: <7ippuz4fb8.wl%jch@pps.univ-paris-diderot.fr> <CAAedzxrV=DZ5dAFizxSTGaZba=KUit59p6uaBZq+2TfMquMRJg@mail.gmail.com>
User-Agent: Wanderlust/2.15.9
MIME-Version: 1.0 (generated by SEMI 1.14.7 - "Harue")
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
X-Greylist: Sender IP whitelisted, not delayed by milter-greylist-4.2.7 (potemkin.univ-paris7.fr [194.254.61.141]); Tue, 09 Jul 2013 17:03:40 +0200 (CEST)
Cc: "<homenet@ietf.org>" <homenet@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [homenet] draft-boutier-homenet-source-specific-routing-00
X-BeenThere: homenet@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
List-Id: <homenet.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/homenet>, <mailto:homenet-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/homenet>
List-Post: <mailto:homenet@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:homenet-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/homenet>, <mailto:homenet-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 09 Jul 2013 15:03:47 -0000

> I'm afraid I'm having a difficult time parsing the sentence, "First,
> since a router only controls the next hop, a route can only be
> selected by the network if it has a selected route as its suffix,
> which makes some forms of global optimisation difficult or
> impossible."

Consider the following topology:

           C
          / \
         /   \
   A -- B     S
         \   /
          \ /
           D

Suppose that B routes packets to S through C; then there is no way
that A can possibly route its own packets to S through D.

What happens here is that the route ABDS cannot be selected because
nobody has selected its suffix BDS.  This limitation doesn't occur
with e.g. source routing or circuit switching.

> [ Section 2.2.2, last paragraph ]
> 
> "which in turn will send it back to B" --> "back to C", if I'm reading
> things correctly.
> 
> [ Section 5, paragraph 2 ]
> 
> I do not think you mean to say that OSPF/IS-IS are both distance
> vector and link state "within" areas.  I think you mean
> s/within/(between|among)/ somewhere in there.

Noted, thanks.

-- Juliusz