Re: [Idr] Revised proposed IDR charter

Jari Arkko <jari.arkko@piuha.net> Thu, 04 February 2010 13:02 UTC

Return-Path: <jari.arkko@piuha.net>
X-Original-To: idr@core3.amsl.com
Delivered-To: idr@core3.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 90A243A6C1C for <idr@core3.amsl.com>; Thu, 4 Feb 2010 05:02:01 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.778
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.778 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.637, BAYES_00=-2.599, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, MIME_HTML_ONLY=1.457]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id DZknmGzukkBF for <idr@core3.amsl.com>; Thu, 4 Feb 2010 05:02:00 -0800 (PST)
Received: from p130.piuha.net (p130.piuha.net [IPv6:2001:14b8:400::130]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1A2A73A68F9 for <idr@ietf.org>; Thu, 4 Feb 2010 05:01:59 -0800 (PST)
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by p130.piuha.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 08F0E2D287; Thu, 4 Feb 2010 15:02:45 +0200 (EET)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at piuha.net
Received: from p130.piuha.net ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (p130.piuha.net [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id SFfgTxJP4wrk; Thu, 4 Feb 2010 15:02:44 +0200 (EET)
Received: from [IPv6:::1] (unknown [IPv6:2001:14b8:400::130]) by p130.piuha.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id A2CB02D26C; Thu, 4 Feb 2010 15:02:44 +0200 (EET)
Message-ID: <4B6AC574.2040804@piuha.net>
Date: Thu, 04 Feb 2010 15:02:44 +0200
From: Jari Arkko <jari.arkko@piuha.net>
User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.23 (X11/20090817)
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: "John G. Scudder" <jgs@juniper.net>
References: <52635EAD-5E0B-4975-BFA5-B315036F59C8@juniper.net> <1D51EAE9-FBFC-450A-9F95-9932086A667C@tcb.net> <D6FF49CD-02A5-41ED-9533-2633419E593A@juniper.net>
In-Reply-To: <D6FF49CD-02A5-41ED-9533-2633419E593A@juniper.net>
Content-Type: text/html; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Cc: idr List <idr@ietf.org>, "idr-chairs@tools.ietf.org" <idr-chairs@tools.ietf.org>, "idr-ads@tools.ietf.org" <idr-ads@tools.ietf.org>, Danny McPherson <danny@tcb.net>
Subject: Re: [Idr] Revised proposed IDR charter
X-BeenThere: idr@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
List-Id: Inter-Domain Routing <idr.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/idr>, <mailto:idr-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/idr>
List-Post: <mailto:idr@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:idr-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/idr>, <mailto:idr-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 04 Feb 2010 13:02:01 -0000

John, Danny,

- Advertisement of the best external route in BGP to assist with
resolution of the next hop in the chosen data plane.
      
Any chance we could add something here about minimizing BGP state, 
everyone one of the options above aims to expand the number of 
unique routes, whereas RRG and all the rest of the world are working
on scalability
    


I am in the same camp as Danny here. I saw John's response that this is already covered by the general scalability work and that no specific proposals have been submitted to date.

I think scalability (including state) is very important. If the WG does not have a current proposals that relate to minimization of state, perhaps you could add a milestone to determine what can be done about it?

Jari