Re: [homenet] Routing Design Team outcome and next steps

Toke Høiland-Jørgensen <toke@toke.dk> Tue, 27 October 2015 13:08 UTC

Return-Path: <toke@toke.dk>
X-Original-To: homenet@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: homenet@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D18E21A88DE for <homenet@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 27 Oct 2015 06:08:31 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -0.693
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.693 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, HELO_EQ_DK=1.009, MIME_8BIT_HEADER=0.3, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=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 BByuvd8Xt1t2 for <homenet@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 27 Oct 2015 06:08:25 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail2.tohojo.dk (mail2.tohojo.dk [77.235.48.147]) (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 560A51A88DA for <homenet@ietf.org>; Tue, 27 Oct 2015 06:08:25 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at mail2.tohojo.dk
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=toke.dk; s=201310; t=1445951303; bh=NOA7pjhMU6c9YeCFCwsaBge9mM+JXH3wcN4+pScxiwo=; h=From:To:Cc:Subject:References:Date:In-Reply-To; b=HQu3laOVd3BB2Plo24qM/JjwO2h4G3Za6t0/L4aTcjf3KfpXp+tz5NQDT4pxrI9is Rrqy28l5e8Hozcru/KMj3pxTaTKs6RbmybxgYls+EhfTyZISaDEkAbvOgN1W0sDpU+ t6uZj/8Y8tL0aTaSH6/WSL0qq+eNTcrcz7iKFAkk=
Sender: toke@toke.dk
Received: by alrua-kau.kau.toke.dk (Postfix, from userid 1000) id 73533C4025B; Tue, 27 Oct 2015 14:08:22 +0100 (CET)
From: =?utf-8?Q?Toke_H=C3=B8iland-J=C3=B8rgensen?= <toke@toke.dk>
To: Lorenzo Colitti <lorenzo@google.com>
References: <562F5B00.9010802@bellis.me.uk> <CAKD1Yr3r=RrGALqSw17X-gwokPJ_ffxA7RMcmT4i2pqhUbOL+A@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 27 Oct 2015 14:08:22 +0100
In-Reply-To: <CAKD1Yr3r=RrGALqSw17X-gwokPJ_ffxA7RMcmT4i2pqhUbOL+A@mail.gmail.com> (Lorenzo Colitti's message of "Tue, 27 Oct 2015 20:18:42 +0900")
X-Clacks-Overhead: GNU Terry Pratchett
Message-ID: <87egggmpbt.fsf@toke.dk>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain
Archived-At: <http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/homenet/f_bvvRQwzeT0h-KLWOSC7jG7T8E>
Cc: HOMENET <homenet@ietf.org>, Ray Bellis <ray@bellis.me.uk>
Subject: Re: [homenet] Routing Design Team outcome and next steps
X-BeenThere: homenet@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
List-Id: IETF Homenet WG mailing list <homenet.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/homenet>, <mailto:homenet-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/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, 27 Oct 2015 13:08:32 -0000

Lorenzo Colitti <lorenzo@google.com> writes:

> Hear, hear!
>
> We have spent far too much time arguing about this, and I am happy we have a
> conclusion. A big thank you to the chairs for calling making this call. I
> strongly agree that given the dynamics of the home networking market, there
> needs to be one, and only one, routing protocol. I don't see anything else
> working in the real world.
>
> Personally, I happen to think that babel is the best choice, not so much because
> of the protocol itself but because of the current availability of solid,
> freely-licensed, small-footprint implementations. But IS-IS would have been fine
> as well; so would OSPF, if there had been an implementation, and even HNCP
> fallback would have fine. At the end of the day it doesn't really matter which
> one we choose, as long as we choose one.
>
> Let's hope that this will stop the arguments and we can all get on with
> implementation and deployment.

+1

-Toke