[nemo] new requirement for draft-ietf-nemo-requirements

Jari Arkko <jari.arkko@piuha.net> Mon, 04 December 2006 14:45 UTC

Received: from [127.0.0.1] (helo=stiedprmman1.va.neustar.com) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1GrF4q-00084S-Ju; Mon, 04 Dec 2006 09:45:52 -0500
Received: from [10.91.34.44] (helo=ietf-mx.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1GrF4p-00084N-0Q for nemo@ietf.org; Mon, 04 Dec 2006 09:45:51 -0500
Received: from p130.piuha.net ([193.234.218.130]) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1GrF4n-0007DX-Ih for nemo@ietf.org; Mon, 04 Dec 2006 09:45:50 -0500
Received: from p130.piuha.net (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by p130.piuha.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id DB8058985F; Mon, 4 Dec 2006 16:45:48 +0200 (EET)
Received: from [127.0.0.1] (p130.piuha.net [193.234.218.130]) by p130.piuha.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 179EF89806; Mon, 4 Dec 2006 16:45:45 +0200 (EET)
Message-ID: <45743493.3010403@piuha.net>
Date: Mon, 04 Dec 2006 16:45:39 +0200
From: Jari Arkko <jari.arkko@piuha.net>
User-Agent: Thunderbird 1.5.0.8 (X11/20061117)
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: IETF NEMO WG <nemo@ietf.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Virus-Scanned: ClamAV using ClamSMTP
X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/)
X-Scan-Signature: 69a74e02bbee44ab4f8eafdbcedd94a1
Cc: Ross Callon <rcallon@juniper.net>
Subject: [nemo] new requirement for draft-ietf-nemo-requirements
X-BeenThere: nemo@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5
Precedence: list
List-Id: NEMO Working Group <nemo.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/nemo>, <mailto:nemo-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Post: <mailto:nemo@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:nemo-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/nemo>, <mailto:nemo-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
Errors-To: nemo-bounces@ietf.org

Hi all,

We reviewed this draft in the IESG, and Ross raised
a requirement that he thinks is important but is not
listed in the current document. It is about the effect
to the Internet routing tables. Please find a suggested
edit below. We thought that this change is large
enough that the WG needs to be consulted, even
if the requirement is fulfilled by NEMO BSP. So,
if you have a problem with this change let us know
by the end of the week (Dec 8th).

NEW Section 3.12:

3.12  Minimal Impact on Internet Routing

Any NEMO solution(s) needs have minimal negative effect on the
global Internet routing system. The solution must therefore limit both
the amount of information that must be injected into Internet routing,
as well as the dynamic changes in the information that is injected
into the global routing system.

As one example of why this is necessary, consider the approach of
advertising each mobile network's connectivity into BGP, and for
every movement withdrawing old routes and injecting new routes.
If there were tens of thousands of mobile networks each advertising
and withdrawing routes, for example, at the speed that an airplane can
move from one ground station to another, the potential effect on BGP
could be very unfortunate. In this example the total amount of routing
information advertised into BGP may be acceptable, but the dynamic
instability of the information (ie, the number of changes over time)
would be unacceptable.

NEW requirement to be added to the end of Section 4:

R17: The solution should have a minimal impact on the
global Internet routing system.