Re: FW: Next steps discussing Routing Challenges of Semantic Addressing

Robert Raszuk <robert@raszuk.net> Fri, 07 May 2021 12:00 UTC

Return-Path: <robert@raszuk.net>
X-Original-To: ipv6@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ipv6@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4BFDE3A1E0D for <ipv6@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 7 May 2021 05:00:26 -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, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=raszuk.net
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 YpoqhP6b29v9 for <ipv6@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 7 May 2021 05:00:21 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-lf1-x136.google.com (mail-lf1-x136.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4864:20::136]) (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 2F5093A1E05 for <6man@ietf.org>; Fri, 7 May 2021 05:00:21 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-lf1-x136.google.com with SMTP id i9so5822001lfe.13 for <6man@ietf.org>; Fri, 07 May 2021 05:00:20 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=raszuk.net; s=google; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=Dh/EulVMI6B2hHHqkGwkwkQ00bm2gDqUQxDzHdFpRZM=; b=ejb89lEtVqRnUAVFi5oCiBIl2urDQ4KhjWT8+PVt8bLH5oO+QNm1DXcXb4liTyNeQO zGI//igDJjl3yFBaA354BR9cKtdfF2XS++JoD2uisGm1xvlpmiZANBXvsAre7aS94uHY URRZryyZ1JCSquMrBC5e/zeZzO9xUFMM2ohTk9AmOHFokkCfiscrI5HDpdTBM6xqIBSU TAQumVWbQoIgNN6i6geOwf4FzykkvVg942IQkX7UY8RwY1JBODXkRe2VnX7ljDMWWOWY vhH5I7sD7Hvyd6/rh80rMmG+ZsGngzvaC3QeygjW7kbnrV7f73doUY96ooCnAnWFvj/W uHEA==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=Dh/EulVMI6B2hHHqkGwkwkQ00bm2gDqUQxDzHdFpRZM=; b=bj/FBRxj8ursMwdStt75o/huFEskWMg6KM6k4nPpKcDWNxy7/dhmcVY0xTxOjT056a +685Cg7baJhSeVHG+mZVLasnnKT2jeMGq9RKfn6LCQt4HJVsFoi6oCj84nlwBswYzNA7 /0Il5MJfgsUSBD3f3BTC5GGwTMi6fg4Sosi6F+dihSjdeImBc8+31HzJwYqvO0gyXTB1 T7MQG3MAIsQbIVztgXCXwR57SUoD9pPuBtsLhEpnkd79yQJJsIX1SxmHKwHV1jhkJRhN nsyGK+mPedvZl0yIYmTtOMrKHsRRuLUKz5Cor5KQsQRSJ1tVf2pqO48K9M+AvoRd8psR EERQ==
X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM530MrRJD+bPIjm79pJjxODTFxB2QVWpG33uJf7pW8GZb0sP3z7BZ 7+NtEA4EuB49kyVDarXDx3OA00iCni8DG8xVJGcFYA==
X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJw2zC8W63Uka52pYd98c6PskfrNBC5hiCbPAMAr9Kmlf0hxmCTk/quJoS35aXQDH4mZG2CPuMDFC3Nqz0D7bgw=
X-Received: by 2002:ac2:4857:: with SMTP id 23mr6259271lfy.541.1620388817668; Fri, 07 May 2021 05:00:17 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <4f22f9591c0a48d1a351f52318cd3319@boeing.com> <CAOj+MMHxh5UmUsPOmun+XGPcBK0=AGLzSpx7Nemni1WzPnta9w@mail.gmail.com> <0e347fa8-0071-ab1f-9872-5611a2128fcb@foobar.org> <c1250d72-2133-95a2-c74b-8649d5aec0f3@gmail.com> <c50ade33-c754-da95-bd71-2fa2d106c9ef@foobar.org>
In-Reply-To: <c50ade33-c754-da95-bd71-2fa2d106c9ef@foobar.org>
From: Robert Raszuk <robert@raszuk.net>
Date: Fri, 07 May 2021 14:00:08 +0200
Message-ID: <CAOj+MMHaGrR4Q-QHv5bvEcbSvhKB646tz338ntFgWZpVBr3E7Q@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: FW: Next steps discussing Routing Challenges of Semantic Addressing
To: Nick Hilliard <nick@foobar.org>
Cc: Brian E Carpenter <brian.e.carpenter@gmail.com>, 6man <6man@ietf.org>, "ipv6@ietf.org" <ipv6@ietf.org>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="000000000000e023b105c1bc2b19"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ipv6/vChqdAf7jPtpMAdFyViMlv1qYUk>
X-BeenThere: ipv6@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: "IPv6 Maintenance Working Group \(6man\)" <ipv6.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/ipv6>, <mailto:ipv6-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/ipv6/>
List-Post: <mailto:ipv6@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:ipv6-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6>, <mailto:ipv6-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 07 May 2021 12:00:26 -0000

Nick,

Please observe that those ideas have been shipping for years and are
deployed in SP networks.

Hint: Slide 5 of https://ripe67.ripe.net/presentations/251-ripe2-4.pdf

Best,
R.

On Fri, May 7, 2021 at 1:56 PM Nick Hilliard <nick@foobar.org> wrote:

> Brian E Carpenter wrote on 06/05/2021 23:21:
> > On 07-May-21 08:34, Nick Hilliard wrote:
> >> Robert Raszuk wrote on 06/05/2021 21:04:
> >>> May I ask why this topic is being taken outside of IETF ?
> >>>
> >>> Is it so difficult to create a new list ? Or is this so off topic to
> say
> >>> ipv6 or 6man lists that it can not be discussed there ?
> >>
> >> briefly:
> >>
> >> 1. yes
> >> 2. no
> >> 3. yes
> >
> > 4. It's an IRTF topic anyway.
>
> On the separate mailing list thing, these are ideas which need a bit of
> blue-sky thinking, so there really isn't an issue using a separate mail
> server for it. The most productive discussions often happen with wild
> ideas thrown around over a coffee with notes written on the back of a
> paper napkin, so neither the IRTF nor the IETF need to feel insecure
> that any initial discussions are happening elsewhere.  If there's an
> outcome which is worth pursuing, that'll be the time when people will
> naturally move it over to I*TF.
>
> Nick
>
>