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

Charrie Sun <charriesun@gmail.com> Tue, 15 December 2009 14:40 UTC

Return-Path: <charriesun@gmail.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 54BB23A67FE for <rrg@core3.amsl.com>; Tue, 15 Dec 2009 06:40:31 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.124
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.124 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.474, BAYES_00=-2.599, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001]
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 dGbr8SBROmz0 for <rrg@core3.amsl.com>; Tue, 15 Dec 2009 06:40:30 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail-vw0-f203.google.com (mail-vw0-f203.google.com [209.85.212.203]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4741C3A67F1 for <rrg@irtf.org>; Tue, 15 Dec 2009 06:40:30 -0800 (PST)
Received: by vws41 with SMTP id 41so1145900vws.15 for <rrg@irtf.org>; Tue, 15 Dec 2009 06:40:13 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:mime-version:received:date:message-id:subject :from:to:content-type; bh=j/lI2NgtJusebttc9wH2GPU32V0DA5T+OyLu8EAOkfc=; b=upYz7L3liabk761hGdAZD+P1jszcOCIOGkhCv3REAzlVHl6GzB68MXV6m2owdagozA koMTPWiO890V0Gb1vsQacdxqNYS/ZxgubHEyP8nHOjF0TR5nySOP7UN0SKrgudmu+IBe qzVQaq5DcrzCq8t+44VikWk4uJlxSz7uYw3yM=
DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=mime-version:date:message-id:subject:from:to:content-type; b=GgWRCb/3Nh6EplW6t9AHL1cqx/bRC26VznQ5Fm4OUA5g+Fc13J0IPqXYBivKQCDbof /J8KIEaXmAq9F78jxuvx8O+4ff7Et0544cm6aY43RA/7jdXt4sWN6FU+UB39aTKNHwn9 qxhDOGZGyJir1wJauGI+sdSen5uRfe9xM4n+s=
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.220.122.205 with SMTP id m13mr1179172vcr.40.1260888013371; Tue, 15 Dec 2009 06:40:13 -0800 (PST)
Date: Tue, 15 Dec 2009 22:40:13 +0800
Message-ID: <4eb512450912150640v7a80f976qc4e31411a4f7f45d@mail.gmail.com>
From: Charrie Sun <charriesun@gmail.com>
To: "heinerhummel@aol.com" <heinerhummel@aol.com>, rrg@irtf.org
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="0016e68f9f782379fc047ac55e69"
Subject: Re: [rrg] belated msg: further description of the recommendation process
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: Tue, 15 Dec 2009 14:40:31 -0000

   Hi Heiner,
   Thanks for your advice. I didn't fully catch your idea but i will try to
answer your questions inline.

>Sun Letong,
>your proposal shows that the strong belief in mapping doesn't crumble at
all.

   I didn't think that mappings should be all in blocks (is that what you
mean?) and be not crumbled, i just think that edge address being allocated
individually, especially in tomorrow's IPv6 scene is rather rare. So the
vast block mappings would make mapping table size to be happily smaller.

>Speaking in analogy once more, I have tried - in vain - to convince people
that a routable namespace a la Manhattan, New >York is better than using a
non-routable namespace where you depend on >mapping. In New York you can
progress towards your destination without asking people at each junction of
avenue and street.
>

 Do you mean that to put the detailed address as well as the rough (city
level, or larger) address all in a packet? Or, it is like geo-based routing?
While i consider that very persuasive, i doubt its deployability. Would
current users change their address, especially in such a large scale? Trying
to solve the problem indirectly, i.e. using mapping, would be more
applicable.

>Besides that the scalability problem could indeed become a non-issue (for
ever), it strikes me that    the inherent capabilities of geographical
coordinates-based routing wrt IP mobility aren't appreciated >neither by
Nokia nor Ericsson folks.
>

Sorry i didn't catch your last sentence.

>Good luck for your proposal
>
>Heiner

Best Regards,
Letong