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

Michael Menth <> Sun, 13 December 2009 17:42 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5F0D53A6828 for <>; Sun, 13 Dec 2009 09:42:26 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: 0.165
X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.165 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_40=-0.185, HELO_EQ_DE=0.35]
Received: from ([]) by localhost ( []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id tMzKufU2ivZb for <>; Sun, 13 Dec 2009 09:42:25 -0800 (PST)
Received: from ( []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id DC45C3A67B6 for <>; Sun, 13 Dec 2009 09:42:24 -0800 (PST)
Received: from virusscan.mail (localhost []) by mailrelay.mail (Postfix) with ESMTP id 57ABC5ACCB; Sun, 13 Dec 2009 18:42:08 +0100 (CET)
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by virusscan.mail (Postfix) with ESMTP id 511DF5ACB3; Sun, 13 Dec 2009 18:42:08 +0100 (CET)
X-Virus-Scanned: by amavisd-new at
Received: from [] ( []) by (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 05E6E5CCBD; Sun, 13 Dec 2009 18:42:07 +0100 (CET)
Message-ID: <>
Date: Sun, 13 Dec 2009 18:41:46 +0100
From: Michael Menth <>
Organization: University of Wuerzburg
User-Agent: Thunderbird (Windows/20090812)
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Lixia Zhang <lixia@CS.UCLA.EDU>
References: <5976B445-7209-4DE5-9D83-E2920265EB27@CS.UCLA.EDU>
In-Reply-To: <5976B445-7209-4DE5-9D83-E2920265EB27@CS.UCLA.EDU>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1"; format="flowed"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Subject: Re: [rrg] belated msg: further description of the recommendation process
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
List-Id: IRTF Routing Research Group <>
List-Unsubscribe: <>, <>
List-Archive: <>
List-Post: <>
List-Help: <>
List-Subscribe: <>, <>
X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 13 Dec 2009 17:42:26 -0000

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: 

Kind regards,


Lixia Zhang schrieb:
> sorry folks, day job crisis delayed this msg for a few days.
> Tony and I have had some discussions on how to collect the 
> recommendation document.  One comment we have heard repeated from a 
> number of people is that our recommendation should document the pros 
> and cons of different approaches, which can be very valuable, even 
> independent from whichever specific recommendations we may end up with.
> 1/ To steer efforts toward that goal, we would like each proposal to 
> make a concise summary, preferably no longer than ~1000 words (it may 
> contain pointer to more detailed document), that describes the key 
> ideas of the proposal of exactly how it addresses routing scalability 
> issue, where is its cost, and where is its gain.
> Given this message is getting out late, we would like to extend the 
> submission time from 12/15 to 12/22, before people drift away from 
> work to holidays (scream now if it does not work for some reason)
> 2/ with the above, we start contrast and compare proposals with each 
> other.
> We need to summarize the outcome of this step into a short document of 
> the pros and cons for each proposal.
> Tony, please help add things that I may have lost from memory
> Lixia
> PS; it is top on my todo list to get all the step-forward proposals on 
> RRG wiki. this weekend.
> _______________________________________________
> rrg mailing list

Dr. Michael Menth, Assistant Professor
University of Wuerzburg, Institute of Computer Science
Am Hubland, D-97074 Wuerzburg, Germany, room B206
phone: (+49)-931/31-86644 (new), fax: (+49)-931/888-6632