IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [rrg] Reminder

"Joel M. Halpern" <jmh@joelhalpern.com> Mon, 08 June 2009 01:57 UTC

Return-Path: <jmh@joelhalpern.com>
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 F12E53A6B5E for <rrg@core3.amsl.com>; Sun, 7 Jun 2009 18:57:48 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -3.684
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.684 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.085, BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-1]
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 dDii9N6M-1I3 for <rrg@core3.amsl.com>; Sun, 7 Jun 2009 18:57:48 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from hermes.mail.tigertech.net (hermes.mail.tigertech.net [64.62.209.72]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 593163A6834 for <rrg@irtf.org>; Sun, 7 Jun 2009 18:57:48 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by hermes.tigertech.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 588B5430523; Sun, 7 Jun 2009 18:57:53 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: Debian amavisd-new at hermes.tigertech.net
Received: from [10.10.10.100] (pool-71-161-52-172.clppva.btas.verizon.net [71.161.52.172]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by hermes.tigertech.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id C79DF430519; Sun, 7 Jun 2009 18:57:52 -0700 (PDT)
Message-ID: <4A2C701D.1060000@joelhalpern.com>
Date: Sun, 07 Jun 2009 21:57:49 -0400
From: "Joel M. Halpern" <jmh@joelhalpern.com>
User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.21 (Windows/20090302)
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Toni Stoev <irtf@tonistoev.info>
References: <200906080449.27707.irtf@tonistoev.info>
In-Reply-To: <200906080449.27707.irtf@tonistoev.info>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1"; format="flowed"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Cc: IRTF RRG <rrg@irtf.org>
Subject: Re: [rrg] Reminder
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, 08 Jun 2009 01:57:49 -0000

No Toni.  Those two ideas are neither "the" nor "premise" for the work 
of the RRG.  They are ideas that we are looking at that, in some peoples 
judgment, for some architectural directions, are likely to be helpful.

Joel

Toni Stoev wrote:
> Dear fellow (re)searchers,
> 
> I like to remind you of the following:
> Naming node, not interface, with locator and separating inter-domain from intra-domain routing are both together the premises for reaching the design goal of significantly improved routing scalability.
> 
> Toni
> _______________________________________________
> rrg mailing list
> rrg@irtf.org
> http://www.irtf.org/mailman/listinfo/rrg
>

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email