Re: [homenet] Updates to Homenet Architecture Principles doc

Juliusz Chroboczek <jch@pps.univ-paris-diderot.fr> Thu, 12 June 2014 22:19 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 (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 664531A02C4 for <homenet@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 12 Jun 2014 15:19:28 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.55
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.55 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, HELO_EQ_FR=0.35] 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 RFeK0LoHG42o for <homenet@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 12 Jun 2014 15:19:27 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from korolev.univ-paris7.fr (korolev.univ-paris7.fr [IPv6:2001:660:3301:8000::1:2]) (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 69AAE1A02BC for <homenet@ietf.org>; Thu, 12 Jun 2014 15:19:27 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr (mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr [81.194.30.253]) by korolev.univ-paris7.fr (8.14.4/8.14.4/relay1/46573) with ESMTP id s5CMJMeu024136; Fri, 13 Jun 2014 00:19:22 +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 B166E2A8694; Fri, 13 Jun 2014 00:19:22 +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 VU_2uyFH36aW; Fri, 13 Jun 2014 00:19:21 +0200 (CEST)
Received: from ijon.pps.univ-paris-diderot.fr (unknown [78.194.40.74]) (Authenticated sender: jch) by mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 1A6622A866F; Fri, 13 Jun 2014 00:19:21 +0200 (CEST)
Date: Fri, 13 Jun 2014 00:19:48 +0200
Message-ID: <87ppidsrcr.wl%jch@pps.univ-paris-diderot.fr>
From: Juliusz Chroboczek <jch@pps.univ-paris-diderot.fr>
To: Ted Lemon <mellon@fugue.com>
In-Reply-To: <6607014A-246F-4476-BF08-468C6FBC34E2@fugue.com>
References: <BEB843C7-EB1D-486A-A9A1-B99D48775D33@nominet.org.uk> <539A19AE.2080605@globis.net> <87wqclssfx.wl%jch@pps.univ-paris-diderot.fr> <6607014A-246F-4476-BF08-468C6FBC34E2@fugue.com>
User-Agent: Wanderlust/2.15.9
MIME-Version: 1.0 (generated by SEMI-EPG 1.14.7 - "Harue")
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
X-Greylist: Sender IP whitelisted, not delayed by milter-greylist-4.2.7 (korolev.univ-paris7.fr [194.254.61.138]); Fri, 13 Jun 2014 00:19:22 +0200 (CEST)
X-Miltered: at korolev with ID 539A276A.002 by Joe's j-chkmail (http : // j-chkmail dot ensmp dot fr)!
X-j-chkmail-Enveloppe: 539A276A.002 from mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr/mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr/null/mailhub.math.univ-paris-diderot.fr/<jch@pps.univ-paris-diderot.fr>
X-j-chkmail-Score: MSGID : 539A276A.002 on korolev.univ-paris7.fr : j-chkmail score : . : R=. U=. O=. B=0.000 -> S=0.000
X-j-chkmail-Status: Ham
Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/homenet/hePtf0Edve6o_b4Ee3fbPcWrGjg
Cc: Ray Hunter <v6ops@globis.net>, "homenet@ietf.org Group" <homenet@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [homenet] Updates to Homenet Architecture Principles doc
X-BeenThere: homenet@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
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: Thu, 12 Jun 2014 22:19:28 -0000

> But what is the routing supposed to accomplish?

Good point.

The role of the routing protocol is to provide good enough end-to-end
connectivity often enough, where good/often enough is defined by user
expectations.

> Rapid convergence has been mentioned.

That's an implementation technique for achieving "often enough".

(OSPF converges extremely fast, but doesn't offer any guarantees about
what happens before convergence.  Babel converges slower, but is usually
able to route packets correctly before it converges: Babel uses
a different implementation technique to achieve "often enough".)

> Load sharing?

That's an implementation technique for achieving "good enough".

> Path redundancy?

That's an implementation technique for achieving "often enough".

I would suggest that the problems we've been having with the Arch document
are due to describing implementation techniques rather than the expected
result.

-- Juliusz