IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [rrg] belated msg: further description of the recommendation process

Tony Li <tony.li@tony.li> Mon, 14 December 2009 16:20 UTC

Return-Path: <tony.li@tony.li>
X-Original-To: rrg@core3.amsl.com
Delivered-To: rrg@core3.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id CB4B03A6A19 for <rrg@core3.amsl.com>; Mon, 14 Dec 2009 08:20:25 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.722
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.722 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.612, BAYES_05=-1.11]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id CaZ1RpBaSFrO for <rrg@core3.amsl.com>; Mon, 14 Dec 2009 08:20:24 -0800 (PST)
Received: from QMTA08.emeryville.ca.mail.comcast.net (qmta08.emeryville.ca.mail.comcast.net [76.96.30.80]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id CF2C13A6A15 for <rrg@irtf.org>; Mon, 14 Dec 2009 08:20:23 -0800 (PST)
Received: from OMTA18.emeryville.ca.mail.comcast.net ([76.96.30.74]) by QMTA08.emeryville.ca.mail.comcast.net with comcast id H3pQ1d0091bwxycA84LBdW; Mon, 14 Dec 2009 16:20:11 +0000
Received: from [192.168.0.110] ([24.6.155.154]) by OMTA18.emeryville.ca.mail.comcast.net with comcast id H4Lq1d00V3L8a8Q8e4LrXF; Mon, 14 Dec 2009 16:20:51 +0000
Message-ID: <4B2665B9.2080903@tony.li>
Date: Mon, 14 Dec 2009 08:20:09 -0800
From: Tony Li <tony.li@tony.li>
User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.23 (Windows/20090812)
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: menth@informatik.uni-wuerzburg.de
References: <5976B445-7209-4DE5-9D83-E2920265EB27@CS.UCLA.EDU> <4B25275A.4050101@informatik.uni-wuerzburg.de>
In-Reply-To: <4B25275A.4050101@informatik.uni-wuerzburg.de>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1"; format="flowed"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Cc: rrg@irtf.org, Lixia Zhang <lixia@CS.UCLA.EDU>
Subject: Re: [rrg] belated msg: further description of the recommendation process
X-BeenThere: rrg@irtf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
List-Id: IRTF Routing Research Group <rrg.irtf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://www.irtf.org/mailman/listinfo/rrg>, <mailto:rrg-request@irtf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.irtf.org/mail-archive/web/rrg>
List-Post: <mailto:rrg@irtf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:rrg-request@irtf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://www.irtf.org/mailman/listinfo/rrg>, <mailto:rrg-request@irtf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 14 Dec 2009 16:20:26 -0000

Michael Menth wrote:
> Hi Lixia,
> 
> do mapping systems also belong to the discussed proposals? I assume they 
> do not although a lot of the complexity taken out of the routing is put 
> into them? If I am wrong, I would like to add FIRMS to the list of 
> discussed proposals:
> http://www3.informatik.uni-wuerzburg.de/~menth/Publications/papers/Menth09-FIRMS.pdf 


Michael,

Mapping systems are obviously a component of a solution but are not by 
themselves a solution.  To be considered seriously, they should be used 
in conjunction with some network layer solution.

Regards,
Tony

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email