IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [lisp] [Ideas] WG Review: IDentity Enabled Networks (ideas)

Randy Bush <randy@psg.com> Thu, 12 October 2017 03:15 UTC

Return-Path: <randy@psg.com>
X-Original-To: lisp@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: lisp@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 39AC7134320; Wed, 11 Oct 2017 20:15:23 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -6.901
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.901 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
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 kSfbQkWdvzcI; Wed, 11 Oct 2017 20:15:21 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ran.psg.com (ran.psg.com [IPv6:2001:418:8006::18]) (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 9FED9124F57; Wed, 11 Oct 2017 20:15:21 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=ryuu.rg.net) by ran.psg.com with esmtp (Exim 4.86_2) (envelope-from <randy@psg.com>) id 1e2Txv-0004YS-2y; Thu, 12 Oct 2017 03:15:19 +0000
Date: Thu, 12 Oct 2017 12:15:17 +0900
Message-ID: <m21sm93vlm.wl-randy@psg.com>
From: Randy Bush <randy@psg.com>
To: Dino Farinacci <farinacci@gmail.com>
Cc: IETF Rinse Repeat <ietf@ietf.org>, lisp@ietf.org
In-Reply-To: <4ED1DD7F-FD96-4934-9518-EDE5DB4858BE@gmail.com>
References: <150670160872.14128.2758037992338326085.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> <778d5504-ba4f-d418-7b20-356353bb0fb2@cs.tcd.ie> <CAMm+Lwg61PGrcmu=-e8ciD6Q+XmEaWWDys4g2M657VOjWmaGcg@mail.gmail.com> <CALx6S370-TuoUicWep5vV2NjLPS4d-HP1qVxW_nGrxhBLw6Eug@mail.gmail.com> <8kd5pq.oxb4pv.rtlo8t-qmf@mercury.scss.tcd.ie> <644DA50AFA8C314EA9BDDAC83BD38A2E0EAA7204@sjceml521-mbx.china.huawei.com> <dd2c3bd5-dd37-109b-2e81-0327db4daa09@cs.tcd.ie> <0BA14206-DC82-49EF-A625-B2425FA396F6@gmail.com> <1f254140-1340-6c7d-9c73-e7137562c685@gmail.com> <fa644cc2-161f-8884-3445-2b50d2c2ad23@htt-consult.com> <cf2ca920-f2d2-b65e-05eb-ebe3c30b76d1@huitema.net> <CAG-CQxrdS9L+2+bN=1NcPGuztn4U4OwSWUiNaVcS9Bsm2mtpfA@mail.gmail.com> <b18459d1-7ce1-b83d-787d-9066267d584b@huitema.net> <17BE9E1D-120B-4508-B765-3799134FD708@gmail.com> <CABcZeBPngxTYDHA0T_eeexUyd=yKObADgKz75SNjbWNVoWLfdQ@mail.gmail.com> <C570D442-1D74-42FD-8DB6-1B548A96162E@gmail.com> <CABcZeBPn5PTPhERjU=pW4Mp8KtkOxy71ntymunHgvEEvOMFTzg@mail.gmail.com> <BA1E17F9-4BA1-424C-86D6-A2F677A0A794@gmail.com> <CABcZeBOn2QjoO26upWkCG2zYL+7m-1d=U0ZyiGwqUym+HRctZQ@mail.gmail.com> <4ED1DD7F-FD96-4934-9518-EDE5DB4858BE@gmail.com>
User-Agent: Wanderlust/2.15.9 (Almost Unreal) Emacs/25.2 Mule/6.0 (HANACHIRUSATO)
MIME-Version: 1.0 (generated by SEMI-EPG 1.14.7 - "Harue")
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/lisp/2rN5NsO7dAjh5uKU9P7Euwvh1ao>
Subject: Re: [lisp] [Ideas] WG Review: IDentity Enabled Networks (ideas)
X-BeenThere: lisp@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22
Precedence: list
List-Id: List for the discussion of the Locator/ID Separation Protocol <lisp.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/lisp>, <mailto:lisp-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/lisp/>
List-Post: <mailto:lisp@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:lisp-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/lisp>, <mailto:lisp-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 12 Oct 2017 03:15:23 -0000

> I am trying to design a system. And we need more deployment
> experience.  And I think an IETF working group can help facilitate
> this. Otherwise, people will do it else where and new protocols will
> surface OUTSIDE of the IETF.  And that is when scale, security and
> interoperability is not priority.

old threat which sounds too much of my way or the highway, or i'll take
my ball and go home.

either it is simple to deal with the privacy concerns in the charter
wording or the proposed wg is really not all that concerned with the
privacy issue.  if the latter is the case, then indeed, the ietf may not
be the best place to work on it.

randy

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email