Re: [irs-discuss] IRS comments

Alia Atlas <akatlas@gmail.com> Tue, 31 July 2012 02:12 UTC

Return-Path: <akatlas@gmail.com>
X-Original-To: irs-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: irs-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B290D11E8124 for <irs-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 30 Jul 2012 19:12:09 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -3.599
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.000, BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-1]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id QdDjUcED8xSb for <irs-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 30 Jul 2012 19:12:08 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-gh0-f172.google.com (mail-gh0-f172.google.com [209.85.160.172]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4789321F8569 for <irs-discuss@ietf.org>; Mon, 30 Jul 2012 19:12:08 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by ghbg16 with SMTP id g16so5963052ghb.31 for <irs-discuss@ietf.org>; Mon, 30 Jul 2012 19:12:00 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :cc:content-type; bh=Efd0IJU17vlY6qJCvAXczRdeF2/oB3J7cZQBUPDPVYk=; b=m7HBuV3xNcaD86C8xm2hWMVgJ6Whp+2J3mmU0oHioKQo5g0MtL1pTC9IrJB/YKfKSU 30OEteQB/pHMHlrNeZ+tfk6u4zNxlVsV2Kc6saQFauQTO4cmu1aIgq1Ripv/TDwARFVR hWHm2bbeIwO7ZRDHm+p5wKLbD4SlpLy9eI8KBgNJjhF0+jmLsV0eMcpel4/JD/nO8bBU HNEt5ypHBpcyEIXlfWj/xyK3RBn259vyYLf4yiY02BXCDZEJdXhwQjFEihNfMThezlqL shStS+NTHFEj36mAp2xHbVQuvFFBaocpexrBKgMH4NgcEK4oGXKpEehvJ0cJhqpauX9I sbww==
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.50.236.4 with SMTP id uq4mr676117igc.18.1343700719983; Mon, 30 Jul 2012 19:11:59 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by 10.50.34.169 with HTTP; Mon, 30 Jul 2012 19:11:59 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <812700A304640D4292205D5E83FC59E1061C211F@p-embx01-eq.jnpr.net>
References: <812700A304640D4292205D5E83FC59E1061C211F@p-embx01-eq.jnpr.net>
Date: Mon, 30 Jul 2012 22:11:59 -0400
Message-ID: <CAG4d1rcoD1_0q9mU5AgjV7jvNyx7u5qN-MCvG7p=AZ-rqUYXCg@mail.gmail.com>
From: Alia Atlas <akatlas@gmail.com>
To: Gert Grammel <ggrammel@juniper.net>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Cc: irs-discuss@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [irs-discuss] IRS comments
X-BeenThere: irs-discuss@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
List-Id: "Interface to The Internet Routing System \(IRS\)" <irs-discuss.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/irs-discuss>, <mailto:irs-discuss-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/irs-discuss>
List-Post: <mailto:irs-discuss@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:irs-discuss-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/irs-discuss>, <mailto:irs-discuss-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 31 Jul 2012 02:12:10 -0000

I do agree - and trying to describe IRS can be hard because of
confusion as to whether it is a configuration protocol or ...

It's really to support programmable networks - I rather like the idea
of describing it as Network Programming Plane...

Alia

On Mon, Jul 30, 2012 at 10:05 PM, Gert Grammel <ggrammel@juniper.net>; wrote:
> Alia,
>
> My point was not about the abbreviation. It was about positioning IRS.
> In the end IRS is not yet another MIB nor just another IGP extension.
>
> Gert
>
>
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: Alia Atlas <akatlas@gmail.com>;
> To: Gert Grammel
> Cc: irs-discuss@ietf.org <irs-discuss@ietf.org>;
> Sent: Tue Jul 31 02:44:35 2012
> Subject: Re: [irs-discuss] IRS comments
>
> We can consider other namings, whether NPP or RSI or other suggestions.
>
> I think we still have a bit of time and discussion for the
> requirements before we have to finalize that.
>
> Alia
>
> On Mon, Jul 30, 2012 at 9:40 PM, Gert Grammel <ggrammel@juniper.net>; wrote:
>> Tom,
>>
>> It is confusing to understand whether IRS belongs to a new network management plane or if it's more of a control plane extension. The draft wisely avoids this classification.
>> To me IRS appears to be a completely different beast which should best be  characterized as 'Network Programming Plane' NPP.
>> It neither aims to do full provisioning (as a management plane would do) nor aims to replace routing (as a control plane would do).
>> Hence we better name the baby NPP -- thereby avoiding any linkage to taxation.
>>
>>
>> Gert
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> ----- Original Message -----
>> From: irs-discuss-bounces@ietf.org <irs-discuss-bounces@ietf.org>;
>> To: Lenny Giuliano; Alia Atlas
>> Cc: irs-discuss@ietf.org <irs-discuss@ietf.org>;
>> Sent: Tue Jul 31 01:50:40 2012
>> Subject: Re: [irs-discuss] IRS comments
>>
>>
>> [Re-adding IRS]
>>
>>         Thank you for reviewing and the comments. We will incorporate the edits
>> in the next rev.
>>
>>         --Tom
>>
>>
>> On 7/30/12 5:04 PM, "Lenny Giuliano" <lenny@juniper.net>; wrote:
>>
>>>
>>>Minor points:
>>>
>>>-section 4, para 2, 3rd sentence, "Howeve,r"
>>>
>>>-4.1.3 "There is no bidirectional programmatic interface to add, modify,
>>>    remove or read state from the multicast RIB."
>>>       -How is this unique to mcast?  Couldn't you say the same thing
>>>       about unicast?
>>>
>>>-4.1.3 "The multicast state added need not match to well-known protocol
>>>    installed state.  For instance, traffic received on an specified set,
>>>    or all, interfaces that is destined to a particular prefix from all
>>>    sources or a particular prefix could be subject to the specified
>>>    replication."
>>>       -Not clear to me at all what this para is saying.
>>>
>>>-"IRS"- you may want to select a different acronym that isn't related to
>>>something as unpopular as taxation (something we learned with AMT).
>>>Maybe
>>>RSI instead...
>>>
>>>Overall, I found the doc to be clearly written and straightforward.
>>>Sounds like Openflow for routers.  Not sure if it's intentional that you
>>>didn't mention Openflow, but it did seem like an elephant in the room as
>>>I
>>>was reading thru.  Also, I did wonder what was new and novel here, as
>>>this
>>>sounded like our SDK which has been around for years.
>>>
>>>
>>>-Lenny
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> irs-discuss mailing list
>> irs-discuss@ietf.org
>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/irs-discuss
>> _______________________________________________
>> irs-discuss mailing list
>> irs-discuss@ietf.org
>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/irs-discuss