Re: [irs-discuss] I-D Action: draft-ward-irs-framework-00.txt

Alia Atlas <> Tue, 31 July 2012 01:33 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9051711E810F for <>; Mon, 30 Jul 2012 18:33:12 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -3.599
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-1]
Received: from ([]) by localhost ( []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 9keKtYX1wHGU for <>; Mon, 30 Jul 2012 18:33:11 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ( []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6C3AB21F8441 for <>; Mon, 30 Jul 2012 18:33:11 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by yhq56 with SMTP id 56so5974409yhq.31 for <>; Mon, 30 Jul 2012 18:33:11 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :cc:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; bh=iAmLhcRx6MACkBQlBCE5DBms6+fW6lmPl79JHjiCxyY=; b=bG8/KlquVdyR4Z4t4sCjs9UP+LV8m2ntPd453wcCX+cgjBsz5FKHlBqeiqQ3paV26E kDqcQ0GLRUNbYRdQ2e1khD00ktOG4EglUSv1huryRsRYL//9ZrSnPgUhrgUGEV9EcAtN 3V/Kl9enCICkbTpgUJa/j/ZyjutEj9XoYJntZuqdtvAfxLJmpHBTy+OLWlQOAdgfXgG8 S0SbN166P9DYhJRHtwQrNRMBpWuJbcpRg2NZY9bwB8Jq6BU6l4ZlcmImnBIc5/96bv/Z Jrdk1DhJRjEtGnFmDbML2kt/7TIDxMz0Gmg0luW7PjfpNbwnn2Ua8IQ+qMAePYiBIvLF zlpg==
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by with SMTP id wx2mr457367igb.18.1343698390695; Mon, 30 Jul 2012 18:33:10 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by with HTTP; Mon, 30 Jul 2012 18:33:10 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <>
References: <> <> <>
Date: Mon, 30 Jul 2012 21:33:10 -0400
Message-ID: <>
From: Alia Atlas <>
To: Susan Hares <>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Cc: "Joel M. Halpern" <>, "" <>
Subject: Re: [irs-discuss] I-D Action: draft-ward-irs-framework-00.txt
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
List-Id: "Interface to The Internet Routing System \(IRS\)" <>
List-Unsubscribe: <>, <>
List-Archive: <>
List-Post: <>
List-Help: <>
List-Subscribe: <>, <>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 31 Jul 2012 01:33:12 -0000

Hi Sue,

On Mon, Jul 30, 2012 at 9:16 PM, Susan Hares <> wrote:
> Joel and irs-folks:
> +1 on Joel.
>  Beyond your comments, the requirement prioritization of the interworking of these interfaces is not clearly delineated in this work. This type of prioritization and sequencing is key to multi-interfaces operation on the monitoring, configuration or insertion of information into the depth.

[Alia] Can you further clarify, maybe with an example, which aspect
you are thinking of?   Do you mean the ability of an application to
access multiple sub-interfaces?  The interaction of operations
requested by differerent applications?

> In addition, if you are going to do configuration with roll-forward/roll-back - you need a transaction based processing.

[Alia] I'm pretty sure that I avoided the word "transaction" in both
drafts.  That was deliberate.  Of course, we can have a discussion
about whether or not some form of transactions might be desirable.  I
am concerned about their potentially heavy-weight nature.

> Therefore, you've skipped even requiring the hard problems.

[Alia] Can I optimistically pretend that means that the requirements
we do have don't seem too hard?  For the responsiveness and throughput
goals, I've put a stake in the ground to avoid transaction-based
semantics.  Naturally, the hordes can run over that stake, if

[Alia] For the interaction between different layers of sub-interfaces,
I've been assuming that we'll define the interactions between the
layers based on how they are generally done.  For instance, perhaps we
standardize the idea of preference value - and then the RIB can pick
the best route based upon those preferences.  For interaction between
different applications, I think there's a mixture of
authorization/authentication to get right plus a good set of events
that an application could register for.

> Is this just the -00.draft?

[Alia] Certainly, I expect that we'll uncover more requirements as we
go along.  As I said, some of this is initially setting parts  out of


> Sue
> -----Original Message-----
> From: [] On Behalf Of Joel M. Halpern
> Sent: Monday, July 30, 2012 3:15 PM
> To:
> Subject: Re: [irs-discuss] I-D Action: draft-ward-irs-framework-00.txt
> I am finding this document quite confusing.
> The primary confusion is that the document first says that it is about
> information that can not be manipulated with existing systems, and then
> proceeds to give a list of use cases all of which can be manipulated
> with existing systems at a suitable degree of abstraction.
> As a lesser confusion, the document says that "streaming" is important,
> but then describes "streaming" as "fast, interactive access."  That is
> not streaming.  And depending upon what one means by interactive, plenty
> of systems provide "fest, interactive access."  I realize the document
> later goes on tot talk about speed and frequency of state updates.   But
> that section simply reasserts the earlier terms withotu better
> description or justification.
> Yours,
> Joel
> On 7/30/2012 2:08 PM, wrote:
>> A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts directories.
>>       Title           : Interface to the Routing System Framework
>>       Author(s)       : Alia Atlas
>>                            Thomas Nadeau
>>                            Dave Ward
>>       Filename        : draft-ward-irs-framework-00.txt
>>       Pages           : 21
>>       Date            : 2012-07-30
>> Abstract:
>>     This document describes a framework for a standard, programmatic
>>     interface for full-duplex, streaming state transfer in and out of the
>>     Internet's routing system.  It lists the information that might be
>>     exchanged over the interface, and describes the uses of an interface
>>     to the Internet routing system.
> _______________________________________________
> irs-discuss mailing list
> _______________________________________________
> irs-discuss mailing list