IETF Logo Mail Archive

[spring] Thoughts on optimality

Tony Li <tony.li@tony.li> Thu, 16 September 2021 22:23 UTC

Return-Path: <tony1athome@gmail.com>
X-Original-To: spring@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: spring@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D38E03A0EE1 for <spring@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 16 Sep 2021 15:23:43 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.749
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.749 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FORGED_FROMDOMAIN=0.249, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=no autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com
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 ZPq7MvLeDCAU for <spring@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 16 Sep 2021 15:23:42 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-pg1-x52f.google.com (mail-pg1-x52f.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::52f]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id BFD233A0EDB for <spring@ietf.org>; Thu, 16 Sep 2021 15:23:42 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-pg1-x52f.google.com with SMTP id h3so7609889pgb.7 for <spring@ietf.org>; Thu, 16 Sep 2021 15:23:42 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20210112; h=sender:from:content-transfer-encoding:mime-version:subject :message-id:date:to; bh=sB7TQXNtRW6DVS2mAK3aycoBNMBsvecF6cdNdQOZ3Lk=; b=jq8svYdlp/z/GOG1n9nQ41t7Nb9CN8j1EWjDNAxarhd1v8OqxQH8R3nspovdsnf48W v/55Gyj0C+sY8mZMfhYYnwNsEdhp9Ub4DFZukw3lNi/WXbl7ev27OICpFHumVvlfXsxU lrNDCW5g6s6rdXTsniSf0TWAN/H/6UPnsDOkEJAtEO4lswBOsq+tEsARDNlvnAtCUVwG ZaawZYA3j2bH4xcgX8gHQ7c9u0Di1Ifs/DKz7UDM+E/OoLaNOAfyP5fLcwiltz6Vf49m aVkkNMczR+7Btjyou7bGHrD+GjOdyxxHVEDkuch6WJ5giwTTufvLfvX+lM94CMpb0AqQ CWGA==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20210112; h=x-gm-message-state:sender:from:content-transfer-encoding :mime-version:subject:message-id:date:to; bh=sB7TQXNtRW6DVS2mAK3aycoBNMBsvecF6cdNdQOZ3Lk=; b=hUtmkcpcBH5qqpTg36lFeg6znfqIO6/ZBqh4jRfq+bwrE/GeHBe6S2qZI1sCowU0IE 6NzZWKvVh/6AngmoxTmN9IUuA0YJV9d/utJ0QPPa3277sNZokkofEs+08sDRvh+k+hJ1 N6cz9EWLmUpOzKtC5SQY6ylaxLjqX4x1ltv5mh5g4y0SkMja/YIzIXOm4A6x124k2Ayh Fm77Vnnb52tRfmXMXi7Eo+2A+p7IYO3ILwAky69AQwOU9BLNqPHnVFO7Xr6n245+nlhT woz0wL30U3VgVVyntQW8HgpuUClH6qz4QcLBJvVaS4sbxyhKzm7VbpfSgJPbyRyyJlXf /Gmg==
X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM531IPfonOlAaX4Y1dGNyzhOBYZjLtEu54ULsUWuyw/CI5seoOmRs plqLgx3iT1+4hHdJWUS7hluRF0bD5G4=
X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJxFiG8ueZfofZYzdK5Hi3k4DRwR9FlkRJIid//aphqPozOBLSSKTzeNTT8h5rwv+J+uyM0MQA==
X-Received: by 2002:a62:a20d:0:b029:35b:73da:dc8d with SMTP id m13-20020a62a20d0000b029035b73dadc8dmr7394111pff.54.1631831021152; Thu, 16 Sep 2021 15:23:41 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from smtpclient.apple (c-67-169-103-239.hsd1.ca.comcast.net. [67.169.103.239]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id i10sm3951596pfk.87.2021.09.16.15.23.40 for <spring@ietf.org> (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-ECDSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Thu, 16 Sep 2021 15:23:40 -0700 (PDT)
Sender: Tony Li <tony1athome@gmail.com>
From: Tony Li <tony.li@tony.li>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 14.0 \(3654.120.0.1.13\))
Message-Id: <7F1F9A33-38C8-4F89-9AE2-05E64C6DCF5C@tony.li>
Date: Thu, 16 Sep 2021 15:23:39 -0700
To: spring@ietf.org
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3654.120.0.1.13)
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/spring/HJdF6_qonGhlxqqASlEGUhAiKxM>
Subject: [spring] Thoughts on optimality
X-BeenThere: spring@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: "Source Packet Routing in NetworkinG \(SPRING\)" <spring.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/spring>, <mailto:spring-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/spring/>
List-Post: <mailto:spring@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:spring-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/spring>, <mailto:spring-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 16 Sep 2021 22:23:44 -0000

Hi all,

We now seem headed to be adopting both the requirements and analysis drafts and thoughts start to turn towards the debate for selection.

The requirements draft has done a good job documenting our requirements and the analysis draft gives us a perspective on how the various proposals fulfill those requirements, but a deeper nuance is needed to guide us to making an optimal choice.

To that end, it seems to me that three of the requirements are paramount:

- Encapsulation Header Size
- Forwarding Efficiency
- State Efficiency

Of these three, Forwarding Efficiency and State Efficiency seem like they will be overcome by hardware technology.  Continued growth in semiconductors will help us scale here, so the remaing requirement of the Encapsulation Header Size would seem to predominate, and we should therefore optimize for that.

Regards,
Tony

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email