Re: [rrg] RRG to hibernation Mon, 12 November 2012 09:23 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id B90D821F84BB for <>; Mon, 12 Nov 2012 01:23:49 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.398
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.398 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=1.200, BAYES_00=-2.599, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001]
Received: from ([]) by localhost ( []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id WaiahjmqZ+SI for <>; Mon, 12 Nov 2012 01:23:47 -0800 (PST)
Received: from ( []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id BD33721F8487 for <>; Mon, 12 Nov 2012 01:23:47 -0800 (PST)
Received: from ( []) by (Outbound Mail Relay) with ESMTP id 1E4073800036B; Mon, 12 Nov 2012 04:23:47 -0500 (EST)
Received: from ( []) by (OMAG/Core Interface) with ESMTP id D0645E000081; Mon, 12 Nov 2012 04:23:46 -0500 (EST)
References: <> <08d501cdc07b$582cbdd0$08863970$>
In-Reply-To: <08d501cdc07b$582cbdd0$08863970$>
X-MB-Message-Source: WebUI
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-MB-Message-Type: User
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=""
X-Mailer: Webmail 37130-STANDARD
Received: from by ( with HTTP (WebMailUI); Mon, 12 Nov 2012 04:23:46 -0500
Message-Id: <>
X-Originating-IP: []
Date: Mon, 12 Nov 2012 04:23:46 -0500 (EST)
x-aol-global-disposition: G
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;; s=20110426; t=1352712227; bh=EOP9t5RIKmhMy0jfDJrdlNpJ90tlFEs4hr+F3yCTP74=; h=From:To:Subject:Message-Id:Date:MIME-Version:Content-Type; b=ocxrwZQEhJRqQ/S0rCZp8AwwAbtT5ESn1nzLQ6K/Qwo/oopQIRquddvqmEekDaMjF c4UoW61nwTvY6bHd+7O5DFi35Dr+IxB26ETex1OqdJOW9zgdUD1Zxl5duczqgquXi4 qkgsu3cbklhalZiM8IxK6/gIaIsvafYHRXSop0Lg=
X-AOL-SCOLL-SCORE: 0:2:358541984:93952408
x-aol-sid: 3039ac1d294d50a0c022034a
Subject: Re: [rrg] RRG to hibernation
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
List-Id: IRTF Routing Research Group <>
List-Unsubscribe: <>, <>
List-Archive: <>
List-Post: <>
List-Help: <>
List-Subscribe: <>, <>
X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 12 Nov 2012 09:23:49 -0000

you are absolutely right. However,  avoiding any impact on the users has been the number ONE objective of LISP.
And now, by moving even to LISP-DDT,i.e. dumping allegeable worse variants, the consequences will be disasterous.

-----Urspr√ľngliche Mitteilung----- 
Von: Christian Huitema <>
An: 'Noel Chiappa' <>du>; rrg <>
Verschickt: Mo, 12 Nov 2012 3:13 am
Betreff: Re: [rrg] RRG to hibernation

>     > It does require a new suite of transport protocols
>     > ...
>     > the odds of ever reaching deployment on an approach which requires
>     > to abandon TCP and UDP are not good?
> That's infeasible; you can't require changing all hosts. You need to see
if you can
> come up with some approach that avoids that.
> (E.g. if we have location-identity separatation deployed, you could hide
the new
> locators from the hosts.)

I think that we are giving up too early on the feasibility of updating all
hosts. Indeed, any substantial change in routing and addressing would most
probably end up changing all hosts, or at least most of them. I also think
that a research group should not necessarily shy away from investigations
that affect all hosts. If research comes out with a brilliant shiny star on
the horizon, then engineering might follow. If the best we can do is hack on
the edges of current solutions, then engineering groups can definitely do
that, no need for a research group.

-- Christian Huitema

rrg mailing list