Re: [rrg] Rebooting the RRG Sat, 30 November 2013 20:23 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from localhost ( []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id F0FB11AE28F for <>; Sat, 30 Nov 2013 12:23:03 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: 0.8
X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.8 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=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham
Received: from ([]) by localhost ( []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 64v06vKUD2Yy for <>; Sat, 30 Nov 2013 12:23:01 -0800 (PST)
Received: from ( []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id 487551ADFD5 for <>; Sat, 30 Nov 2013 12:23:01 -0800 (PST)
Received: from ( []) by (Outbound Mail Relay) with ESMTP id D0FCF7017A182; Sat, 30 Nov 2013 15:22:58 -0500 (EST)
Received: from ( []) by (OMAG/Core Interface) with ESMTP id 99FEDE000081; Sat, 30 Nov 2013 15:22:58 -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: Webmail 38203-STANDARD
Received: from by ( with HTTP (WebMailUI); Sat, 30 Nov 2013 15:22:58 -0500
Message-Id: <>
X-Originating-IP: []
Date: Sat, 30 Nov 2013 15:22:58 -0500 (EST)
x-aol-global-disposition: G
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;; s=20121107; t=1385842978; bh=3cWAQ6yt/RS/ED0m5jYftYgyKLEemqavP6d7pBZYiyc=; h=From:To:Subject:Message-Id:Date:MIME-Version:Content-Type; b=dq/1K4zsMX4OpLQQQc7cljLKLPiUc+p8qJTLgGHcJzmtOUdUFuLw61KyhVtV9+xzU mJxhEkJhYIR5Ku+WKWboiE9fb4YCVocK8T5YKmf3UQ2uc3WJr8t8rrBpLtBO1YH/67 WhS+O4aB7Y1fZYnhIXiN0nlzKSX+9qq9+b82a678=
x-aol-sid: 3039ac1d290b529a4922002f
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: Sat, 30 Nov 2013 20:23:04 -0000

This is myproposal. In short: TARA routing,see
In long:
- 6480 x2^32 additional IPv4 Unicast addresses by DNS-mapping  FQDN to {TARA-Locator; IPv4 address} withunique IPv4 addr. per respective geopatch#}
- 6480 x2^16 Multicast addresses
- 6480 x2^16 Anycast addresses, incl. several reasonable proposals for the neededscoping.
Method toensure unique address assignment by the per geopatch  distributed administrators for all threeaddress types. 
The TARA-Locatoris deduced from the geographical coordinates. 
Instead ofany RIB the topologies of  5 zooms of theinter- AND intra-domain internet are recognized and maintained. New forms fora) Unicast-FIB, b) Multicast/Anycast-FIB will be built. Next hop determinationis done by offsetting 4 tables. Neither caching nor binary search across a 500000 entries sized (classic) FIB is required.
Shortest-pathmeans least number of hops: E.g. a 2-hops route from New York to Chigaco viaSan Francisco might be selected in case there is one hop (MPLS-LSP) from NY toSF and another one from SF to Chicago – how would  stratium routing achieve that ?! 
Neither“Istanbul-effect” nor stretch-factor > 1 as with other hierarchical routing concepts 
Constraintbased Unicast forwarding is enabled such that any shortest route or shortestdetour due to sudden blockage is found and adequate directives would guide theforwarding during the detour.
Trafficoverload & traffic congestion is conceived as a networking problem ratherthan a user/TCP issue: Well-scoped advertisement of traffic load informationfor avoiding/resolving congestions will support the routers in order togradually bypass the spot of overload/congestion. 
State-less,world-wide Multicast to millions and millions of receivers such that both thesender and the receivers can be mobile all the time. It also means thegeneration of a first Multicast-FIB ever.  
ALL usercan be mobile all the time, i.e. can exist without any home agent orcare-of-address server; while roaming the user is identified by its homegeopatch number and its IPv4 address.
Incrementaldeployability is guaranteed. Prefix building is only required during thetransformation phase with respect to classic routers attached users.
While { 5octets TARA-Locator ; 4 octets Ipv4 addr} easily fits into a 16 octets sizedIPv6 address and while all TARA routing capabilities are independent from theused address type,
it is yet acommitment pro IPv4, due to lack of belief (based on good reasons outside ofTARA) that IPv6 will ever fly.


-----Ursprüngliche Mitteilung----- 
Von: Tony Li <>
An: rrg <>
Verschickt: Mi, 27 Nov 2013 9:59 am
Betreff: Re: [rrg] Rebooting the RRG

Dear volunteers,

Thanks for offering to help out and contribute to the workshop program. 

I'm very pleased to report that Dmitri Krioukov has tentatively agreed to 

Let's keep adding to the list.

So far, the topics that folks have mentioned look like:

	- The intersection of naming and routing
	- Problems with centralizing control planes
	- Network programmability
	- Routing in ICN (information-centric networking)
	- Multi-layer routing
	- SDN routing, including multi-domain SDN
	- (Ab)use of BGP
	- Mesh routing
	- DTN routing
	- Privacy
	- Compact routing
	- Routing for more generalized addressing
	- Software defined Internet exchange

And some obvious sources of papers to pursue:
	- Routing from SIGCOMM

For those of you have volunteered to help out, could you please:

	- Add other topics to the lists above
	- Add other specific authors that we should invite
	- Reach out and invite speakers

We rely on your help to make this into a successful workshop.


rrg mailing list