Re: [irs-discuss] Rough Draft IRS Charter

Russ White <russw@riw.us> Fri, 19 October 2012 00:14 UTC

Return-Path: <russw@riw.us>
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 BEC8421F8623 for <irs-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 18 Oct 2012 17:14:19 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.599
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 1VJ99upYjVwV for <irs-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 18 Oct 2012 17:14:18 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from da31.namelessnet.net (da31.namelessnet.net [74.124.205.66]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id DA69021F8491 for <irs-discuss@ietf.org>; Thu, 18 Oct 2012 17:14:18 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from rrcs-24-199-145-66.midsouth.biz.rr.com ([24.199.145.66] helo=[192.168.3.130]) by da31.namelessnet.net with esmtpsa (TLSv1:AES256-SHA:256) (Exim 4.77) (envelope-from <russw@riw.us>) id 1TP0EC-0005Uq-1n for irs-discuss@ietf.org; Thu, 18 Oct 2012 17:14:16 -0700
Message-ID: <50809B5F.9060505@riw.us>
Date: Thu, 18 Oct 2012 20:14:23 -0400
From: Russ White <russw@riw.us>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:16.0) Gecko/20121010 Thunderbird/16.0.1
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: irs-discuss@ietf.org
References: <DF7F294AF4153D498141CBEFADB17704C7EC9FE484@EMBX01-WF.jnpr.net> <50804686.2010708@joelhalpern.com> <CAHiKxWjAze1qT4CaWWmN+uNOOLTXAi+s7OE2JXtbm6BpZvMpkg@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CAHiKxWjAze1qT4CaWWmN+uNOOLTXAi+s7OE2JXtbm6BpZvMpkg@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Antivirus-Scanner: Seems clean. You should still use an Antivirus Scanner
Subject: Re: [irs-discuss] Rough Draft IRS Charter
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: Fri, 19 Oct 2012 00:14:19 -0000

>> It seems to me that the second paragraph of the description is misleading
>> and unfortunate.  The proposed interface is not inherently any faster (or
>> slower) than any other existing interface.  It may in fact use existing
>> protocols and mechanisms.  At the same time, the stated goal is to expose
>> information and models that are generalizations or synthesized combinations
>> of what the devices currently expose.  This is unlikely to be meaningfully
>> manipulated using the same paradigms that operators currently use.
> 
> Agree Joel. In addition, there can easily be confusion as terms like
> "fast path" are more conventionally used to refer to switching paths.

+1

It's always easy to say, "this will be faster," but it's going to wind
up being far too implementation dependent to be a really meaningful or
useful measure.

Russ


-- 
<><
riwhite@verisign.com
russw@riw.us