[Ideas] charter-ietf-ideas-00-06

AshwoodsmithPeter <Peter.AshwoodSmith@huawei.com> Thu, 12 October 2017 15:11 UTC

Return-Path: <Peter.AshwoodSmith@huawei.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 C5A181344C5 for <ideas@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 12 Oct 2017 08:11:35 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -4.219
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.219 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3=-0.01, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=-0.01, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=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 P0VXi_2BwO1p for <ideas@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 12 Oct 2017 08:11:32 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from lhrrgout.huawei.com (lhrrgout.huawei.com [194.213.3.17]) (using TLSv1 with cipher RC4-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 1F39D1332CA for <ideas@ietf.org>; Thu, 12 Oct 2017 08:11:31 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from 172.18.7.190 (EHLO lhreml701-cah.china.huawei.com) ([172.18.7.190]) by lhrrg01-dlp.huawei.com (MOS 4.3.7-GA FastPath queued) with ESMTP id DXN54249; Thu, 12 Oct 2017 15:11:29 +0000 (GMT)
Received: from YYZEML701-CHM.china.huawei.com (10.218.33.71) by lhreml701-cah.china.huawei.com (10.201.108.42) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 14.3.301.0; Thu, 12 Oct 2017 16:11:19 +0100
Received: from YYZEML702-CHM.china.huawei.com ([169.254.6.110]) by YYZEML701-CHM.china.huawei.com ([10.218.33.71]) with mapi id 14.03.0301.000; Thu, 12 Oct 2017 11:11:09 -0400
From: AshwoodsmithPeter <Peter.AshwoodSmith@huawei.com>
To: "ideas@ietf.org" <ideas@ietf.org>
Thread-Topic: charter-ietf-ideas-00-06
Thread-Index: AdNDaMxCiCjOceMPTkCY5VOYBfaqMA==
Date: Thu, 12 Oct 2017 15:11:08 +0000
Message-ID: <7AE6A4247B044C4ABE0A5B6BF427F8E23236ECA0@YYZEML702-CHM.china.huawei.com>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
x-originating-ip: [10.193.60.144]
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="_000_7AE6A4247B044C4ABE0A5B6BF427F8E23236ECA0YYZEML702CHMchi_"
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-CFilter-Loop: Reflected
X-Mirapoint-Virus-RAPID-Raw: score=unknown(0), refid=str=0001.0A090206.59DF8622.0034, ss=1, re=0.000, recu=0.000, reip=0.000, cl=1, cld=1, fgs=0, ip=169.254.6.110, so=2013-06-18 04:22:30, dmn=2013-03-21 17:37:32
X-Mirapoint-Loop-Id: 763f81b6d62c873f5a80ae5646af0bef
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ideas/F_NvKgpYn2m4WA9w6aOpUHzTgxY>
Subject: [Ideas] charter-ietf-ideas-00-06
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: Thu, 12 Oct 2017 15:11:36 -0000

Agree with Stuart and Dino,

Mapping systems and other massively distributed noSQL databases are the reason why OTT applications exist and operate so well at such huge scales but they are mostly proprietary and often used for specific applications.

There is a great opportunity with 5G to bring a more modern and flexible routing architecture to life but it needs a standardized widely deployed low latency mapping system.

Peter Ashwood-Smith

----

Re: [Ideas] Alissa Cooper's Block on charter-ietf-ideas-00-06: (with BLOCK)
Stewart Bryant <stewart.bryant@gmail.com>; Thu, 12 October 2017 09:29 UTCShow header<https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/search/?email_list=ideas>
I agree with Dino on this.

We need to find ways to lead and not follow, even if the technology and
the consequences are not to our taste. The market will do what makes
economic sense even if it is not "pure". Pursuit of purity in the face
of economics leads to irrelevance.

This seems a useful body of work to complement our traditional
approaches to this problem.

- Stewart



On 11/10/2017 20:30, Dino Farinacci 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.
>
> Dino
>
>
>> On Oct 11, 2017, at 12:20 PM, Eric Rescorla <ekr@rtfm.com><mailto:ekr@rtfm.com&gt>; wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>> On Wed, Oct 11, 2017 at 12:07 PM, Dino Farinacci <farinacci@gmail.com><mailto:farinacci@gmail.com&gt>; 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
>>
>>