Re: [rrg] Rebooting the RRG Tue, 11 February 2014 21:58 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from localhost ( []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id BBB341A0770 for <>; Tue, 11 Feb 2014 13:58:22 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: 0.253
X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.253 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_50=0.8, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.548, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham
Received: from ([]) by localhost ( []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id fwzbbVoB4NP3 for <>; Tue, 11 Feb 2014 13:58:19 -0800 (PST)
Received: from ( []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id B25811A0783 for <>; Tue, 11 Feb 2014 13:58:13 -0800 (PST)
Received: from ( []) by (Outbound Mail Relay) with ESMTP id E487670007CCD for <>; Tue, 11 Feb 2014 16:58:12 -0500 (EST)
Received: from ( []) by (OMAG/Core Interface) with ESMTP id A71F438000083 for <>; Tue, 11 Feb 2014 16:58:12 -0500 (EST)
References: <> <> <> <> <> <> <>
In-Reply-To: <>
X-MB-Message-Source: WebUI
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-MB-Message-Type: User
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=""
X-Mailer: AOL Webmail 38366-STANDARD
Received: from by ( with HTTP (WebMailUI); Tue, 11 Feb 2014 16:58:12 -0500
Message-Id: <>
X-Originating-IP: []
Date: Tue, 11 Feb 2014 16:58:12 -0500 (EST)
x-aol-global-disposition: G
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;; s=20121107; t=1392155892; bh=pqCRR5HaTe/3vBBTGIXdGddtxEp072OQeNdfNTD5bVU=; h=From:To:Subject:Message-Id:Date:MIME-Version:Content-Type; b=KvX3e+5dlLh9skf7Zu04TzDu1KsahKMGE94fdMtVM+ReHhcLXL5997TnuVnA96mOu 9WChBCsLnEdGqQ8l6dYolu61aa7XCsjBEVxbLVDYyI1N6PhhskiWxoqPyJPVYm+On8 KNkyW2qHnfNBvG0RVjksBSxwR+PeHv9btxM0Yi+Q=
x-aol-sid: 3039ac1af95452fa9cf401f7
Subject: Re: [rrg] Rebooting the RRG
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
List-Id: IRTF Routing Research Group <>
List-Unsubscribe: <>, <>
List-Archive: <>
List-Post: <>
List-Help: <>
List-Subscribe: <>, <>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 11 Feb 2014 21:58:23 -0000

By my last email (see below) I also addressed the need to do something against a total spay of the internet traffic by the NSA.
But there is neither interest nor doubts wrt my email, just complete silence.

Today people are demonstrating against what the NSA is doing persistently. see

But what can I deduct from the silence on this list?

Does it mean that all on this list ok what the NSA is doing? 

pretty disappointed 


-----Ursprüngliche Mitteilung----- 
Von: heinerhummel <>
An: rrg <>
Verschickt: Mi, 5 Feb 2014 1:38 am
Betreff: Re: [rrg] Rebooting the RRG

Lixia excepted, I tried in vain to stimulate a discussion about the IETF's routing paradigms which I have questioned many times:

- the diffserv philosophy (the total absence of the WHERE-awareness)
- the intra-versus inter-domain distinction (Dijkstra versus distance vector)

and also about
- the absence of a MULTICAST FIB.
- the absence of a ANYCAST FIB
- the absence of (scoped) Broadcast
- the negligence of IPv4

This week the German government has been suit by the CCC because it missed/is missing to protect people against spy attacks by the US's  NSA.

With the current routing architecture and its complete absence of any WHERE-awareness there is no way to give back any country its sovereignty. 
With TARA that wouldn't be a problem: Each country would recognize "its" part of the internet (intra- and inter-domain portions alike) and could take action that within its borders packets were encrypted according to its own keys. Packets which are being sent to outside of the country would be recognized as such ones and the user might be questioned to confirm whether forwarding should be done or not - just like he is reminded  to add a subject line if missing.

Whenever an airplane crosses illegally some country, it is conceived as a violation of the respective nation's sovereignty. But spying  out  a l l   communication data is by far worse.
That crashes any nation's sovereignty. Attempts to accomplish mutual no-spy treaties show the helplessness of the German government. The right way would be  - and here is the  IETF asked to come up with results - to provide  solutions which PREVENT spy attacks as we are experiencing today in the first place!  

I know that NSA folks are as well subscribed to this list (but eventually they may have positive feeling towards Edward S. too).

I think such a security service is the most important one of all that can be based on the WHERE-awareness, much more important than to be able to redirect parts of the traffic such that they bypass some congested area to the left or to the right.

But so far no one has even tried to explain the advantages of the current architecture.


-----Ursprüngliche Mitteilung----- 
Von: Eggert, Lars <>
An: IRTF Routing RG <>
Verschickt: Di, 4 Feb 2014 7:35 pm
Betreff: Re: [rrg] Rebooting the RRG


nobody is debating that there's interesting routing research being done. We even 
gave quite a number of ANRPs (Applied Networking Research Prizes) to routing 
papers, and flew the main authors to IETF meetings to present.

What we don't seem to have is a core group of RRG participants with the energy 
of reaching out to and bringing the research that is out there into the group, 
on a continuous basis. Those of you who feel that the group should stay around, 
please realize that you need to dedicate some of your own time towards making 
that happen.


rrg mailing list