Re: "The IETF has difficulty solving complex problems" or alternatively Why IMS is a big fat ugly incomprehensiable protocol

"JFC (Jefsey) Morfin" <jefsey@jefsey.com> Thu, 15 September 2005 13:17 UTC

Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=megatron.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1EFtcb-0001fn-Hu; Thu, 15 Sep 2005 09:17:49 -0400
Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1EFtcZ-0001c1-B7 for ietf@megatron.ietf.org; Thu, 15 Sep 2005 09:17:47 -0400
Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org (ietf-mx [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id JAA09645 for <ietf@ietf.org>; Thu, 15 Sep 2005 09:17:45 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from montage.altserver.com ([63.247.74.122]) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1EFthL-0000Sj-NH for ietf@ietf.org; Thu, 15 Sep 2005 09:22:46 -0400
Received: from i01m-62-35-167-26.d4.club-internet.fr ([62.35.167.26] helo=jfc.afrac.org) by montage.altserver.com with esmtpa (Exim 4.44) id 1EFtcI-00071c-Ne; Thu, 15 Sep 2005 06:17:32 -0700
Message-Id: <6.2.3.4.2.20050915124120.0421ce00@mail.jefsey.com>
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 6.2.3.4
Date: Thu, 15 Sep 2005 15:17:22 +0200
To: Pekka Nikander <pekka.nikander@nomadiclab.com>, Iljitsch van Beijnum <iljitsch@muada.com>
From: "JFC (Jefsey) Morfin" <jefsey@jefsey.com>
In-Reply-To: <4A09791C-AF36-4C86-923A-D38343C2E037@nomadiclab.com>
References: <20050804050502.GB6084@sbrim-wxp01> <42F89F9F.5070008@zurich.ibm.com> <C5A01F62-A076-46C7-8C67-6568E752A1E7@nomadiclab.com> <4321D5E9.9010609@shockey.us> <151701c5b570$052a25a0$0500a8c0@china.huawei.com> <C0DE65F6343F8BD987425795@B50854F0A9192E8EC6CDA126> <43249A80.3020303@piuha.net> <4324A849.4060509@cs.columbia.edu> <BB8C050D-B298-4A8A-9325-45B149FC04AD@nomadiclab.com> <4A763861-D4E9-44DD-A193-8E73EC4E03A7@muada.com> <4A09791C-AF36-4C86-923A-D38343C2E037@nomadiclab.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"; format="flowed"
X-AntiAbuse: This header was added to track abuse, please include it with any abuse report
X-AntiAbuse: Primary Hostname - montage.altserver.com
X-AntiAbuse: Original Domain - ietf.org
X-AntiAbuse: Originator/Caller UID/GID - [47 12] / [47 12]
X-AntiAbuse: Sender Address Domain - jefsey.com
X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/)
X-Scan-Signature: d185fa790257f526fedfd5d01ed9c976
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
X-MIME-Autoconverted: from 8bit to quoted-printable by ietf.org id JAA09645
Cc: IETF Discussion <ietf@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: "The IETF has difficulty solving complex problems" or alternatively Why IMS is a big fat ugly incomprehensiable protocol
X-BeenThere: ietf@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5
Precedence: list
List-Id: IETF-Discussion <ietf.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf>, <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Post: <mailto:ietf@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf>, <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
Sender: ietf-bounces@ietf.org
Errors-To: ietf-bounces@ietf.org

Dear Pekka,
I went through a few of your documents to better understand the basic 
of HIP. When I told you I prefer models: your proposition could fit 
my model. But if I see identification, authentication and routing 
matters being addressed, I see proposed changes enough to suspect 
that this will affect the level above (DNS) and below (IP 
addressing). I would suggest you try to think of simple, robust, 
scalable global Internet architecture which would include your 
proposition and permit a transparent transition. I think this is 
possible in what I call the "multi-Internet", I do not know if this 
is possible in the "mono-Internet" you refer to. Because I feel you 
add an intelligence on the wire?

May I suggest a test? How would you support "ISP rotation": your Elm 
Street person has several addresses and wants to rotate them with a 
defined pattern within the same relation, for example for security 
purposes? (you might call this a directed multi-homing?)

I note that you could also associate HI to predetermined paths as 
well (anti-tapping protection)?
jfc

At 09:57 15/09/2005, Pekka Nikander wrote:
>>>So, as I state in my little web page, I think we really should
>>>work hard to create a new waist for the architecture.   I, of
>>>course, have my own theory where the new waist should be and how
>>>it should be implemented,
>>
>>Well, don't be shy: where can we absorb these insights?
>
>Since you ask:
>
>Unfortunately I don't have any concise summary of my "theory", but
>wading through my academic papers (available through my home page)
>should give a fairly good view.  I would focus on the following three
>papers, roughly in this order:
>
>1. Pekka Nikander, Jukka Ylitalo, and Jorma Wall, "Integrating
>Security, Mobility, and Multi-Homing in a HIP Way," in Proceedings of
>Network and Distributed Systems Security Symposium (NDSS'03),
>February 6-7, 2003, San Diego, CA, pp. 87-99, Internet Society,
>February, 2003.
>
>2. Jukka Ylitalo, Pekka Nikander, "A new Name Space for End-Points:
>Implementing secure Mobility and Multi-homing across the two versions
>of IP," in Proceedings of the Fifth European Wireless Conference,
>Mobile and Wireless Systems beyond 3G (EW2004), pp. 435-441,
>Barcelona, Spain, February 24-27, 2004.
>
>3. Pekka Nikander, Jari Arkko, and Börje Ohlman, Host Identity
>Indirection Infrastructure (Hi3)," in Proceedings of The Second
>Swedish National Computer Networking Workshop 2004 (SNCNW2004),
>Karlstad University, Karlstad, Sweden, Nov 23-24, 2004.
>
>Especially the last one is pretty dense; it takes time to understand
>all that we are trying to say there.
>
>All three (and more) are available at
>http://www.tml.tkk.fi/~pnr/publications/index.html
>
>If you prefer slideware, see our IETF 62 plenary slides:
>http://www3.ietf.org/proceedings/05mar/plenaryt.html
>http://www3.ietf.org/proceedings/05mar/slides/plenaryt-1.pdf
>
>But, as I wrote, I am trying to take distance from these and trying
>to understand alternative approaches, like "virtualising IP" or
>"domain-based internetworking" that some people are thinking about.
>It is now mostly other people that are continuing the HIP-based work,
>for example, at the CEC funded Ambient Networks project and at the
>IRTF HIP Research Group.
>
>--Pekka Nikander
>
>
>
>_______________________________________________
>Ietf mailing list
>Ietf@ietf.org
>https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf
>


_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf@ietf.org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf