Re: [irs-discuss] IRS Problem Statement Posted

Thomas Nadeau <> Tue, 31 July 2012 16:32 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id 762B721F8615 for <>; Tue, 31 Jul 2012 09:32:18 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -6.405
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.405 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.194, BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4]
Received: from ([]) by localhost ( []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id gdgC1x6NGPrv for <>; Tue, 31 Jul 2012 09:32:18 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ( []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id CC2D821F860B for <>; Tue, 31 Jul 2012 09:32:17 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ([]) (using TLSv1) by ([]) with SMTP ID DSNKUBgIkCpGrnOLiBBTC/; Tue, 31 Jul 2012 09:32:17 PDT
Received: from ( by ( with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id; Tue, 31 Jul 2012 09:26:06 -0700
Received: from ( by ( with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 14.1.355.2; Tue, 31 Jul 2012 09:26:04 -0700
Received: from ([fe80::1914:3299:33d9:e43b]) by ([fe80::d0d1:653d:5b91:a123%11]) with mapi; Tue, 31 Jul 2012 12:25:46 -0400
From: Thomas Nadeau <>
To: "" <>, "" <>
Date: Tue, 31 Jul 2012 12:25:46 -0400
Thread-Topic: [irs-discuss] IRS Problem Statement Posted
Thread-Index: Ac1vOSOevvKerhxBRmWJOFJOwe0kug==
Message-ID: <>
In-Reply-To: <>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
user-agent: Microsoft-MacOutlook/
acceptlanguage: en-US
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
MIME-Version: 1.0
Subject: Re: [irs-discuss] IRS Problem Statement Posted
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 16:32:18 -0000

On 7/31/12 9:16 AM, "Robert Raszuk" <>; wrote:

>> IMO the ability to manipulate routing state, context, etc... is what IRS
> > brings to the table and this capability is needed..
>> Jim Uttaro
>Manipulating routing state from outside of routing protocols seems to me
>like tampering with jet engines during the flight.

	Network operators modify the routing system while it is in flight all
the time using other interfaces, so I fail to see why this is so alarming.

>There is no point to keep arguing about IRS framework .. it can call to
>address world hunger or propose to turn Sahara into rain forest.
>I think we need to wait and see actual protocol(s) proposals which
>write/stream into current routing systems as opposed to industry
>alternatives which target to write to forwarding layer directly or use
>already proposed IETF tools like NETCONF which already provide a very
>good provisioning abstraction today.
>My observation is that IRS is yet one more attempt to wave the SDN
>banner in the IETF without much substance behind it.

	We would appreciate keeping the discussion focused on whether or not this
is a good problem to solve, and identifying that clearly. We are not
interested in 
pontifications about the IETF, its management or policies on this list. 8)