Re: L3 RFC draft help

Aqua Q Glass <aquaqglass@gmail.com> Sun, 25 April 2021 16:49 UTC

Return-Path: <aquaqglass@gmail.com>
X-Original-To: ietf@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ietf@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 81ADD3A0BC7 for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sun, 25 Apr 2021 09:49:07 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.098
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.098 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_BLOCKED=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.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 NdIgVxUmCpGS for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sun, 25 Apr 2021 09:49:05 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-qk1-x736.google.com (mail-qk1-x736.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::736]) (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 267643A0BC2 for <ietf@ietf.org>; Sun, 25 Apr 2021 09:49:05 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-qk1-x736.google.com with SMTP id x11so54310750qkp.11 for <ietf@ietf.org>; Sun, 25 Apr 2021 09:49:04 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=content-transfer-encoding:from:mime-version:subject:date:message-id :references:in-reply-to:to; bh=vuT3Fc8NAQn/3+ufCCrNRq+PoSdJhoELJAlURw217mQ=; b=iVlyoT2F4M15Qwj1Da7WZXDLatYDcsEoIoR4YK2JQYNNxh37funnskz/lL/7rX462b tJOqh6XmdAJNE9ekMf7W5yNrhSCf6Es/K0lWdAf2IrKEPA+nF73qVEJ+3UNTkzVcXt0S R6wYXsgRsxIunQr9eyPFBvVMOdoNYxZ0XvcakVJb7TemMQmtkTLo26qpfee3kYWiCcM/ 5Doai7IN/XXbHBztj6UC0DzwcjGSoed+yJGc9DKE8osotj4TQ9psT4Nl+7p5UAfXkMtZ nPWHJSkEus9LPATXMYMMPbyimsKn4tqHX6k2vwQCl0m+d/8IoQ634t79+B34u8zVcWHm 1FNw==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:content-transfer-encoding:from:mime-version :subject:date:message-id:references:in-reply-to:to; bh=vuT3Fc8NAQn/3+ufCCrNRq+PoSdJhoELJAlURw217mQ=; b=sLLuA/nSXUqWmDbyXIbcnwnXs6ANZ/BZJLwd0V4UIElWPmoIP5m4EBb76K08wYkaYP lY/+OtqQ0BZf81zxUsYIQNa5gmnoImDcDFR3DR4Wfi8w6TIuOiEgNBjIzLD9fCcvPF/W 6OkK3FlMlNfvKH7qVNSwJtZu1sAcgpAWEqOlR4O8ouIwgpMeholFqIxnQ4Hn6LhAbrwf wxfgh0ZoPFnHHYK7KeqyMzPCFZsxUQ3qnznDsrtIILgwGJ0pkT0K9MpISxOxYMwAEM9P +2nt2hXWhKRWdxNTW8bePVrkCJqa9Bmg9VctIjGJJkfqgm1pnuU1JIi6z6RndjZS2l3q KhFQ==
X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM530802la91297xVb1cdsdGDyT7gIKQhuKa6ou/a5R7nyWwndYJ9O 57wiMHu8o9z+CGcRXL/7Yo72qRt+IpyhnA==
X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJzlg8VdqG9aJzMu64iBG8dXSS/ktSvZbjS9UC3xP/TAe3I5wviY7u71THZmYhJqbOCXQbxumw==
X-Received: by 2002:ae9:ebd1:: with SMTP id b200mr13661297qkg.200.1619369342878; Sun, 25 Apr 2021 09:49:02 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ?IPv6:2600:1700:2f74:1a10:d469:e8a4:ff88:683c? ([2600:1700:2f74:1a10:d469:e8a4:ff88:683c]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id e14sm8290593qte.78.2021.04.25.09.49.01 for <ietf@ietf.org> (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 bits=128/128); Sun, 25 Apr 2021 09:49:02 -0700 (PDT)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
From: Aqua Q Glass <aquaqglass@gmail.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0 (1.0)
Subject: Re: L3 RFC draft help
Date: Sun, 25 Apr 2021 09:49:00 -0700
Message-Id: <8417DFFD-7251-4C88-A80C-A36A78B70ED3@gmail.com>
References: <C8387637-A4D8-457A-A589-312CC2C1F33F@gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <C8387637-A4D8-457A-A589-312CC2C1F33F@gmail.com>
To: ietf@ietf.org
X-Mailer: iPhone Mail (18D70)
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ietf/AppqMgvC0RIGDkyIzVyG5HSPZfw>
X-BeenThere: ietf@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: IETF-Discussion <ietf.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/ietf>, <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/ietf/>
List-Post: <mailto:ietf@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf>, <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 25 Apr 2021 16:49:08 -0000

Following up on interest for this :: I know TLDs are doing marvels with layer 7 protocols for.. well their To Be Determined.. but wouldn’t it be nice for networks to route trust?  

I mean.. as to involve the communities which care to provide software, a hardware advantage.

As always and usual, threaded comments welcome.

#aQ


Sent from my iPhone

> On Apr 20, 2021, at 11:29 AM, Aqua Q Glass <aquaqglass@gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> Hey.  It occurs to me that while all this net neutrality talk is going on, we should reconcile our inability to discern optional identities at the protocol level, and so it is suggestible that IP routers engage at their routable layers this film to provide for a modular open protocol for soft humans to be, well.  Human.  In their chosen soft styled internet, where presentation and deft thought towards thought markings are known to be. And identities route traffic, through towards the expected.
> 
> Think back towards your 1970s selves, where your modem is light on bits, but well your content is heavy on thought, deliverable and digestable.  Further this with a sharing of known pathways in around which path choices are then, perhaps prefixed with community identities which allow for the (other) groupings to wit and match at thread speed and without the uneeded.
> 
> Who here wrote their last RFC draft?  and I am interested in the language parser, if somebody wants to give it a whirl and produce with us the first Ethics license, subbed from (any number of licenses) and with a clause of protocol participation.
> 
> And as expected, your request for comments?
> 
> #aQ
> 
> 
> <image0.png>
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone