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

Alissa Cooper <alissa@cooperw.in> Wed, 11 October 2017 19:53 UTC

Return-Path: <alissa@cooperw.in>
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 EB3A51342EB; Wed, 11 Oct 2017 12:53:28 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.72
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.72 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3=-0.01, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=-0.01, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=cooperw.in header.b=RgNtFT8V; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=messagingengine.com header.b=hgOa81s9
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 WFoqiJj5gubA; Wed, 11 Oct 2017 12:53:09 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from out1-smtp.messagingengine.com (out1-smtp.messagingengine.com [66.111.4.25]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 7F4821342E9; Wed, 11 Oct 2017 12:52:59 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from compute7.internal (compute7.nyi.internal [10.202.2.47]) by mailout.nyi.internal (Postfix) with ESMTP id E618421590; Wed, 11 Oct 2017 15:52:58 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from frontend2 ([10.202.2.161]) by compute7.internal (MEProxy); Wed, 11 Oct 2017 15:52:58 -0400
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=cooperw.in; h=cc :content-type:date:from:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version :references:subject:to:x-me-sender:x-me-sender:x-sasl-enc; s= fm1; bh=zmcF1w5RksoANN5vfbkqxt+vJ2L/bIjFMjHIGdaU0yk=; b=RgNtFT8V 4zCF/GHxAV+wUckal2sWuD1mqhjNvRRuFKm8s9oFA8PpSN7O/5NCgWkvbwwoK5ef GbvMlZIDItgZCi+l0MliOzJt9vRZt2GMpj9mI61UVGPpDS3CESK5ag5OQ65ZiP9o 3QuqvHFiIHw1erOEOmImWjwbp1I1CJLZy/H+9EuW4OSAeB7QX8319TDMvCarl0PB rFl0SUdYsZPZQeWfI2m+EUgzd7281LN4R7ks9Fb6h+ZX8yxz/PoWbPRtxJz9uAQn 0JjMG8WSiKV0Rc3gArygfY2B2DDaNcfqgkORkuVJQTjYjodPke+LFhpcsLWrmTPK TUQx/Aulsd63Tw==
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d= messagingengine.com; h=cc:content-type:date:from:in-reply-to :message-id:mime-version:references:subject:to:x-me-sender :x-me-sender:x-sasl-enc; s=fm1; bh=zmcF1w5RksoANN5vfbkqxt+vJ2L/b IjFMjHIGdaU0yk=; b=hgOa81s9JQjNIxq+apEBqD/XBU+rgBvJArMlxNqyuN1UX yteUxLDupSun/fbVgaIQeyCpGIH/biXsawdRH2rGQHe3hB5azFzEPREE1nsQ1UXu qyuPv3aa1lglvDZzwNhJli5zeUN3zzx1tvJix5IZHfnXKnLGxpZXiKgyZffwXrEw 0wT7yHqdg4lh4pUsfMEB2xrkVemy3OTKg7R+Gr7713bzcAlwsI574F9zeHa6gTHl 3Lp5h30qOMXiHyu72pNh0FZSBgzG8MXowxgdy6XhYm0cJybq+KojLJUemJG5sRgb D+4AwrwQ5ocpnmJXQ+7HgB3fignysC8WKZ4YG1XyA==
X-ME-Sender: <xms:mnbeWdpT75kOOEifBNq7CNtfkbLjH3gkJqpCj2ZOJWCVJ8JbGBqItw>
Received: from sjc-alcoop-88112.cisco.com (unknown [128.107.241.182]) by mail.messagingengine.com (Postfix) with ESMTPA id 63EE82479F; Wed, 11 Oct 2017 15:52:57 -0400 (EDT)
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="Apple-Mail=_E536AA4B-29E1-43A6-A99D-19F194539EBD"
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 9.3 \(3124\))
From: Alissa Cooper <alissa@cooperw.in>
In-Reply-To: <CALx6S36xXCEqwBMU-Xm1U_sK7Xo7A4mxYQYp56kkTGSP7gZtRw@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 11 Oct 2017 15:52:55 -0400
Cc: Dino Farinacci <farinacci@gmail.com>, Eric Rescorla <ekr@rtfm.com>, ideas-chairs@ietf.org, ideas@ietf.org, IESG <iesg@ietf.org>, aretana.ietf@gmail.com
Message-Id: <98DFD478-9B18-4F5E-B5DC-0DD254DC7FC2@cooperw.in>
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> <CALx6S36xXCEqwBMU-Xm1U_sK7Xo7A4mxYQYp56kkTGSP7gZtRw@mail.gmail.com>
To: Tom Herbert <tom@herbertland.com>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3124)
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ideas/v3dlAhF5tU14LqShcCNLPPZ2Jco>
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 19:53:29 -0000

> On Oct 11, 2017, at 3:42 PM, Tom Herbert <tom@herbertland.com> wrote:
> 
> 
> 
> On Wed, Oct 11, 2017 at 12:30 PM, Dino Farinacci <farinacci@gmail.com <mailto: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…

The immediate question before the IESG is whether to charter a working group with the charter and deliverables as currently proposed. If someone wanted to propose a more limited charter or a different charter that focuses on these unmentioned aspects, we would certainly evaluate it anew.

Alissa

> 
> Tom
>  
> Dino
> 
> 
> > On Oct 11, 2017, at 12:20 PM, Eric Rescorla <ekr@rtfm.com <mailto:ekr@rtfm.com>> wrote:
> >
> >
> >
> > On Wed, Oct 11, 2017 at 12:07 PM, Dino Farinacci <farinacci@gmail.com <mailto: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 <mailto:Ideas@ietf.org>
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ideas <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ideas>
>