Re: Last Call: draft-ietf-rtgwg-ipfrr-spec-base (Basic Specification for IP ...

[HeinerHummel at aol.com]

Sounds good.
But let me also suggest that this group does also participate in the  RRG 
activities:
I know how badly the orthogonality between intra- and inter-domain routing  
hampers rerouting.
Unfortunately this is a severe obstacle we have to  live with, given the 
current link-state versus distance vector   paradigms. But when research (not 
engineering) for a future architecture is in  stake, such anachronism should be 
overcome.
 
IBM TV-commercials show truckers, lost in the dessert, who suggest to ask  
their transport goods where they were. IMO, routers shouldn't get in similar  
trouble as to ask the Google-map application they are just servicing :-)
 
Heiner
 
 
In einer eMail vom 30.04.2008 14:40:56 Westeuropäische Normalzeit schreibt  
stbryant at cisco.com:

Beginning

Stewart


HeinerHummel at aol.com wrote:
>  Question: Is the accomplishment of this document considered to be the 
>  end or rather the beginning of activities on the rerouting topic  ?
>  
> Heiner
>  
> In einer eMail vom  29.04.2008 22:35:53 Westeuropäische Normalzeit 
> schreibt  iesg-secretary at ietf.org:
>
>     The IESG has  received a request from the Routing Area Working
>      Group WG
>     (rtgwg) to consider the following  document:
>
>     - 'Basic Specification for IP  Fast-Reroute: Loop-free Alternates '
>         <draft-ietf-rtgwg-ipfrr-spec-base-12.txt> as a Proposed  Standard
>
>     The IESG plans to make a decision  in the next few weeks, and solicits
>     final comments  on this action.  Please send substantive comments
>   to the
>     ietf at ietf.org mailiFrom ietf-bounces at ietf.org  Thu May  1 08:11:11 2008
Return-Path: <ietf-bounces at ietf.org>
X-Original-To: ietf-web-archive at megatron.ietf.org
Delivered-To: ietfarch-ietf-web-archive at core3.amsl.com
Received: from core3.amsl.com (localhost [127.0.0.1])
	by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 513023A6AB4;
	Thu,  1 May 2008 08:11:11 -0700 (PDT)
X-Original-To: ietf at core3.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ietf at core3.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1])
	by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 70DF33A6B52;
	Wed, 30 Apr 2008 08:24:18 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.202
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.202 tagged_above=-999 required=5
	tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, MIME_QP_LONG_LINE=1.396]
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 9AY239r2gUm4; Wed, 30 Apr 2008 08:24:17 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from imo-m14.mx.aol.com (imo-m14.mx.aol.com [64.12.138.204])
	by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 38F6328C334;
	Wed, 30 Apr 2008 08:21:44 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from HeinerHummel at aol.com
	by imo-m14.mx.aol.com (mail_out_v38_r9.3.) id c.c2c.32e700f4 (39952);
	Wed, 30 Apr 2008 11:21:39 -0400 (EDT)
From: HeinerHummel at aol.com
Message-ID: <c2c.32e700f4.3549e882 at aol.com>
Date: Wed, 30 Apr 2008 11:21:38 EDT
Subject: Re: Last Call: draft-ietf-rtgwg-ipfrr-spec-base (Basic Specification
	for IP ...
To: stbryant at cisco.com
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Mailer: 9.0 SE for Windows sub 5017
X-Mailman-Approved-At: Thu, 01 May 2008 08:11:09 -0700
Cc: ietf at ietf.org, ietf-announce at ietf.org, rtgwg at ietf.org
X-BeenThere: ietf at ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
List-Id: IETF Discussion <ietf.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf>,
	<mailto:ietf-request at ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Post: <mailto:ietf at ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:ietf-request at ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf>,
	<mailto:ietf-request at ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="==============31089240=="
Sender: ietf-bounces at ietf.org
Errors-To: ietf-bounces at ietf.org

Sounds good.

But let me also suggest that this group does also participate in the RRG activities:

I know how badly the orthogonality between intra- and inter-domain routing hampers rerouting.

Unfortunately this is a severe obstacle we have to live with, given the current link-state versus distance vector  paradigms. But when research (not engineering) for a future architecture is in stake, such anachronism should be overcome.

 

IBM TV-commercials show truckers, lost in the dessert, who suggest to ask their transport goods where they were. IMO, routers shouldn't get in similar trouble as to ask the Google-map application they are just servicing :-)

 

Heiner

 

 

In einer eMail vom 30.04.2008 14:40:56 Westeuropäische Normalzeit schreibt stbryant at cisco.com:

Beginning

Stewart


HeinerHummel at aol.com wrote:
> Question: Is the accomplishment of this document considered to be the
> end or rather the beginning of activities on the rerouting topic ?
> 
> Heiner
> 
> In einer eMail vom 29.04.2008 22:35:53 Westeuropäische Normalzeit
> schreibt iesg-secretary at ietf.org:
>
>     The IESG has received a request from the Routing Area Working
>     Group WG
>     (rtgwg) to consider the following document:
>
>     - 'Basic Specification for IP Fast-Reroute: Loop-free Alternates '
>        <draft-ietf-rtgwg-ipfrr-spec-base-12.txt> as a Proposed Standard
>
>     The IESG plans to make a decision in the next few weeks, and solicits
>     final comments on this action.  Please send substantive comments
>     to the
>     ietf at ietf.org mailing lists by 2008-05-13. Exceptionally,
>     comments may be sent to iesg at ietf.org instead. In either case, please
>     retain the beginning of the Subject line to allow automated sorting.
>
>     The file can be obtained via>
>
>     IESG discussion can be tracked via
>     https://datatracker.ietf.org/public/pidtracker.cgi?command=view_id&dTag=12272&rfc_flag=0
>
>     _______________________________________________
>     rtgwg mailing list
>     rtgwg at ietf.org
>     https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/rtgwg
>
> 
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> _______________________________________________
> rtgwg mailing list
> rtgwg at ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/rtgwg
>  

 

_______________________________________________
IETF mailing list
IETF at ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf