Re: [scale] new updated slides

Loa Andersson <loa@pi.nu> Mon, 09 December 2013 05:51 UTC

Return-Path: <loa@pi.nu>
X-Original-To: scale@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: scale@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 15CC11AD8DA for <scale@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sun, 8 Dec 2013 21:51:24 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.901
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.901 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.001] autolearn=ham
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id UOxLFIczKqVF for <scale@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sun, 8 Dec 2013 21:51:21 -0800 (PST)
Received: from pipi.pi.nu (pipi.pi.nu [83.168.239.141]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A960B1AD7BE for <scale@ietf.org>; Sun, 8 Dec 2013 21:51:21 -0800 (PST)
Received: from [192.168.1.2] (unknown [112.208.74.180]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) (Authenticated sender: loa@pi.nu) by pipi.pi.nu (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 30BA1180348C; Mon, 9 Dec 2013 06:51:14 +0100 (CET)
Message-ID: <52A55A4F.8090104@pi.nu>
Date: Mon, 09 Dec 2013 13:51:11 +0800
From: Loa Andersson <loa@pi.nu>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.2; WOW64; rv:24.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/24.1.1
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Pedro Roque Marques <pedro.r.marques@gmail.com>
References: <529B6AF9.8040306@pi.nu> <1FAFE93A-4ED6-44E5-BFCE-57002C75D75F@gmail.com> <52A16202.9030904@pi.nu> <C0E8F232-337E-4469-A20C-B20898153B32@gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <C0E8F232-337E-4469-A20C-B20898153B32@gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Cc: Lou Berger <lberger@labn.net>, scale@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [scale] new updated slides
X-BeenThere: scale@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
List-Id: MPLS VPN Scaling <scale.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/scale>, <mailto:scale-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/scale/>
List-Post: <mailto:scale@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:scale-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/scale>, <mailto:scale-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 09 Dec 2013 05:51:24 -0000

Pedro,
<snip>

>
> I suspect that i'm not the only one that is going to have an
   intuitive negative reaction to frame label allocation policy
   and architecture discussions as "scale". I believe you saw
   similar comments from others in the list.

Yes - I think we agree (mostly), but the fact that I recognize
it as an "intuitive negative reaction" makes me wait a bit.

> I'd strongly recommend you to consider removing these. I
   believe that there is room for additional discussion when
   it comes to label allocation techniques. But "scale" wouldn't
   be typically seen as a "backdoor" attempt and get a default
   negative reaction.

hmmmm - I'm not sure about removing, I'd say (if my gut feeling
is right) that we should say that that "different label allocation
policies does not have a (positive) impact on scaling".

/Loa

<snip>
>
> _______________________________________________
> scale mailing list
> scale@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/scale
>

-- 


Loa Andersson                        email: loa@mail01.huawei.com
Senior MPLS Expert                          loa@pi.nu
Huawei Technologies (consultant)     phone: +46 739 81 21 64