Re: [Ideas] Alissa Cooper's Block on charter-ietf-ideas-00-06: (with BLOCK)

Tom Herbert <tom@herbertland.com> Wed, 11 October 2017 19:42 UTC

Return-Path: <tom@herbertland.com>
X-Original-To: ideas@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ideas@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id BCEF7124239 for <ideas@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 11 Oct 2017 12:42:19 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.899
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.899 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001] autolearn=unavailable autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=herbertland-com.20150623.gappssmtp.com
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 OsArpDzdlqj9 for <ideas@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 11 Oct 2017 12:42:17 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-qt0-x22f.google.com (mail-qt0-x22f.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:400d:c0d::22f]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 0F0FB134184 for <ideas@ietf.org>; Wed, 11 Oct 2017 12:42:17 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-qt0-x22f.google.com with SMTP id z50so8672901qtj.4 for <ideas@ietf.org>; Wed, 11 Oct 2017 12:42:16 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=herbertland-com.20150623.gappssmtp.com; s=20150623; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=D1ZVd2vgEhyYGsZA1Oo0sL71/5HvaKTCKKbWhuEe1DA=; b=uY73sZJPrese2XanJZSvHCXmInVoE9M+0t+1k35Gr2BaSCd63fuMCEs+KWbUm/TUmz qZT0ncLmRbWMRA/gBTtrzzlZ9dY+LuHBNMp5B7d6DgtqbjLM9C7hWj8japCA6Fq1S23S WYLXZJgcwPvDfk1KhH2KGv+A0HSn1ScyX5QMIgR+sw7biyiiCCDIMRQ3ryiznDduBYEc jYJmNfpVk+zZSV+8v4qiDrWk5PZ50Pnol9G+6txHARJ+ZBgKOP24QlsaxY1GP8iKhEno z7+L8CAFeLLzH+TZUMNpdtg24fwCTwYP4T9m3C/3q+eEG1Be7hGgw6r8VAn5t0FgFJZC kxZA==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=D1ZVd2vgEhyYGsZA1Oo0sL71/5HvaKTCKKbWhuEe1DA=; b=arXqBsSenGXutOr2yrmtyWzs0Ol8tPpED4c5zAIk3vy29qXvfyJhgA6HgftAwSILDh ASqeaceTTS83SqDYrozNjqvZidtfqD0jEtsMezNzmvfcXye+I9OQnP2dGEe8it33CLwi e7zs/Z9/+x4Vuf2J73+80+dtw4FIyctx0PRJcWJ7XGpYhKb5EAPi1U9rCwmptjjKXUHz oCjbfliseE+GYgZeHQ8p/AyvrWjPl46G3IKyx8Pz3ESY1kan72M0JBL3G1y2F56DsXMJ WP4MGdpbymGp1MMQ2aJggZNECZ/UMQMDWmA+r4cbnYlHpHtaIzbxB1pV99uPupx6lKvs sQMA==
X-Gm-Message-State: AMCzsaV1wvQ8Z8ffTEOcJA8SQbyjYiml3e3YhXrXyIwE72xv/KDwQEAw iXtACAlItfgsPFOmIw4AmQnGs7flZbE2QVZphir4EA==
X-Google-Smtp-Source: AOwi7QAiHVy/qyvHZ2u5VcNHV5vRhCyGThrHqI8jhXsu4crh5CjVYBTsbAUg42mNoQI2/cYsMSyi9GckdxOQq9ENMB8=
X-Received: by 10.200.47.85 with SMTP id k21mr205495qta.286.1507750936199; Wed, 11 Oct 2017 12:42:16 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.237.48.144 with HTTP; Wed, 11 Oct 2017 12:42:15 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <F0F78529-AB1A-4B5F-B18B-FFAAF72FC5F3@gmail.com>
References: <150773363527.24819.15137383317907133805.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> <47ABE650-B83D-4400-B27C-C0E5F1C8BA13@gmail.com> <CABcZeBMG+OyYv1Kaeb1BeuUX_Tc3yz8TYObtv7JTVteSuY35Gg@mail.gmail.com> <F0F78529-AB1A-4B5F-B18B-FFAAF72FC5F3@gmail.com>
From: Tom Herbert <tom@herbertland.com>
Date: Wed, 11 Oct 2017 12:42:15 -0700
Message-ID: <CALx6S36xXCEqwBMU-Xm1U_sK7Xo7A4mxYQYp56kkTGSP7gZtRw@mail.gmail.com>
To: Dino Farinacci <farinacci@gmail.com>
Cc: Eric Rescorla <ekr@rtfm.com>, ideas-chairs@ietf.org, ideas@ietf.org, Alissa Cooper <alissa@cooperw.in>, The IESG <iesg@ietf.org>, aretana.ietf@gmail.com
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="001a1137ae26f65806055b4a9e32"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ideas/CCAXd2Sxbkj1h0HmCS_wsRSZGWU>
Subject: Re: [Ideas] Alissa Cooper's Block on charter-ietf-ideas-00-06: (with BLOCK)
X-BeenThere: ideas@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22
Precedence: list
List-Id: "Discussions relating to the development, clarification, and implementation of control-plane infrastructures and functionalities in ID enabled networks." <ideas.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/ideas>, <mailto:ideas-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/ideas/>
List-Post: <mailto:ideas@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:ideas-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ideas>, <mailto:ideas-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 11 Oct 2017 19:42:20 -0000

On Wed, Oct 11, 2017 at 12:30 PM, Dino Farinacci <farinacci@gmail.com>;
wrote:

> I am reaching out to the SD-WAN community. There has been huge investment
> from the VC community in overlay startups. They are all using proprietary
> control-planes. There is no interoperability among them. The IETF should
> not ignore this market and should help shape it.
>
> This is VXLAN-in-the-data-center market all over again making IETF working
> group nvo3 irrelevant.
>
> Mapping Databases ARE being deployed under the auspices of
> SDN-controllers. There are high profile user-groups that endorse the
> activity. It is not going away.
>
> IETF needs to lead and not follow.
>
> +1

The need for a common mapping system has already been discussed for for
years in nvo3. With the emergence of identifier-locator protocols, and
particularly their utility to provide seamless mobility at large scale, the
need for a well defined mapping system has become more evident. IMO this is
a problem IETF should work on.

Note that identity, which is what most of this discussion has been about,
is only one aspect of the mapping system for identifier-locator protocols
and network virtualization. There are many other aspects that have not been
mentioned but need attention. I am worried that we might be throwing the
baby out with the bath water as they say...

Tom


> Dino
>
>
> > On Oct 11, 2017, at 12:20 PM, Eric Rescorla <ekr@rtfm.com>; wrote:
> >
> >
> >
> > On Wed, Oct 11, 2017 at 12:07 PM, Dino Farinacci <farinacci@gmail.com>;
> wrote:
> >> (1) The work is insufficiently motivated. The claims about the need for
> the
> >> mapping system and the identity management system envisioned here do
> not appear
> >> to be backed up by those who have developed and deployed ID/LOC
> separation
> >> protocols. Nor do there seem to be compelling arguments that the
> framework that
> >> this proposed WG would produce would be the motivator for further
> interoperable
> >> deployments.
> >
> > This is simply not true. The IETF mailing lists are not finding the
> reach of interest that exists in the industry
> >
> > Be that as it may, the determination of consensus and justification has
> to be made primarily on what appears on the mailing lists and at meetings.
> >
> > -Ekr
> >
> >
> > Dino
> >
> >
>
> _______________________________________________
> Ideas mailing list
> Ideas@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ideas
>