IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [Ideas] Your Input requested: Charter Proposal New Version

Alexander Clemm <alexander.clemm@huawei.com> Mon, 07 August 2017 21:34 UTC

Return-Path: <alexander.clemm@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 07397124BE8 for <ideas@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 7 Aug 2017 14:34:08 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -4.22
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.22 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] 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 iDVgODdv_PLM for <ideas@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 7 Aug 2017 14:34:05 -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 233CB1200F3 for <ideas@ietf.org>; Mon, 7 Aug 2017 14:34:05 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from 172.18.7.190 (EHLO lhreml705-cah.china.huawei.com) ([172.18.7.190]) by lhrrg02-dlp.huawei.com (MOS 4.3.7-GA FastPath queued) with ESMTP id DMD56124; Mon, 07 Aug 2017 21:34:02 +0000 (GMT)
Received: from SJCEML701-CHM.china.huawei.com (10.208.112.40) by lhreml705-cah.china.huawei.com (10.201.108.46) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 14.3.301.0; Mon, 7 Aug 2017 22:34:01 +0100
Received: from SJCEML703-CHM.china.huawei.com ([169.254.5.240]) by SJCEML701-CHM.china.huawei.com ([169.254.3.13]) with mapi id 14.03.0301.000; Mon, 7 Aug 2017 14:33:52 -0700
From: Alexander Clemm <alexander.clemm@huawei.com>
To: Padma Pillay-Esnault <padma.ietf@gmail.com>, Tom Herbert <tom@herbertland.com>
CC: "ideas@ietf.org" <ideas@ietf.org>
Thread-Topic: [Ideas] Your Input requested: Charter Proposal New Version
Thread-Index: AQHTDzzgUS7uPdtb6kawD7XMB3wLtKJ5q4cAgAAilQD//5w1UA==
Date: Mon, 07 Aug 2017 21:33:51 +0000
Message-ID: <644DA50AFA8C314EA9BDDAC83BD38A2E0E0ED16F@SJCEML703-CHM.china.huawei.com>
References: <CAG-CQxpxDXxLXdu0a2GdBRfTFLM_C+jqCz58HoNim52C7Yzr8g@mail.gmail.com> <CALx6S35qzym9quRRdv-TFDJW-hRXe+iGi8Db5T16JD8mExbr4w@mail.gmail.com> <CAG-CQxoWTrhhTD7gOyceDn+WEKqDfa11rqv2810Hdg028z4Ygg@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CAG-CQxoWTrhhTD7gOyceDn+WEKqDfa11rqv2810Hdg028z4Ygg@mail.gmail.com>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
x-originating-ip: [10.213.48.112]
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="_000_644DA50AFA8C314EA9BDDAC83BD38A2E0E0ED16FSJCEML703CHMchi_"
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-CFilter-Loop: Reflected
X-Mirapoint-Virus-RAPID-Raw: score=unknown(0), refid=str=0001.0A020204.5988DCCB.0106, ss=1, re=0.000, recu=0.000, reip=0.000, cl=1, cld=1, fgs=0, ip=169.254.5.240, so=2013-06-18 04:22:30, dmn=2013-03-21 17:37:32
X-Mirapoint-Loop-Id: 568c37afbae3014cd6950539b3eda132
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ideas/UiyxAsbZauddoq64KuRCKmOgVWE>
Subject: Re: [Ideas] Your Input requested: Charter Proposal New Version
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: Mon, 07 Aug 2017 21:34:08 -0000

I am not sure we should restrict ourselves to mapping between identifiers and locators.

I would at a minimum want to include mappings between identifiers, and between identifiers and (for lack of a better term) groupings of identifiers.

If we take out the identity concept, we should also rename the WG.

--- Alex

From: Ideas [mailto:ideas-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Padma Pillay-Esnault
Sent: Monday, August 07, 2017 1:28 PM
To: Tom Herbert <tom@herbertland.com>
Cc: ideas@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [Ideas] Your Input requested: Charter Proposal New Version

Hi Tom


>
> To this end, the working group shall:
>
> - define a framework for the development of an identifier/locator mapping
> system that provides a common solution for all identifier/locator mapping
> protocols and network virtualization.
>
Padma,

I think this statement could be stronger and express that the common
mapping system and protocols are expected output from WG. How about
something like: "Define and develop a common mapping system, control
plane, and related protocol that provide a common solution for
identifier/locator protocols that map identifiers to locators, as well
as network virtualization protocols that map virtual to physical
addresses"

Fine with me.

Let's poll the list for consensus on this.

Thanks
Padma

Tom

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email