IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [Roll] Working Group LastCall:draft-ietf-roll-protocols-survey-02

"Dearlove, Christopher (UK)" <chris.dearlove@baesystems.com> Tue, 09 December 2008 15:04 UTC

Return-Path: <roll-bounces@ietf.org>
X-Original-To: roll-archive@ietf.org
Delivered-To: ietfarch-roll-archive@core3.amsl.com
Received: from [127.0.0.1] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D120528C16C; Tue, 9 Dec 2008 07:04:31 -0800 (PST)
X-Original-To: roll@core3.amsl.com
Delivered-To: roll@core3.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6B9BC28C17B for <roll@core3.amsl.com>; Tue, 9 Dec 2008 07:04:31 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -6.469
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.469 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.130, BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4]
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 AN+GMwvprW-K for <roll@core3.amsl.com>; Tue, 9 Dec 2008 07:04:30 -0800 (PST)
Received: from smtp2.bae.co.uk (smtp2.bae.co.uk [20.133.0.12]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 66FED28C16B for <roll@ietf.org>; Tue, 9 Dec 2008 07:04:30 -0800 (PST)
Received: from smtpb.greenlnk.net (smtpb.greenlnk.net [10.15.160.219]) by smtp2.bae.co.uk (Switch-3.1.10/Switch-3.1.10) with ESMTP id mB9F4M9U026928 for <roll@ietf.org>; Tue, 9 Dec 2008 15:04:22 GMT
Received: from glkas0002.GREENLNK.NET (glkas0002.greenlnk.net [10.15.184.52]) by smtpb.greenlnk.net (Switch-3.1.9/Switch-3.1.9) with ESMTP id mB9F4LR9015432 for <roll@ietf.org>; Tue, 9 Dec 2008 15:04:21 GMT
Received: from glkms1100.GREENLNK.NET ([10.15.184.108]) by glkas0002.GREENLNK.NET with InterScan Message Security Suite; Tue, 09 Dec 2008 15:03:55 -0000
Received: from GLKMS2100.GREENLNK.NET ([10.15.184.93]) by glkms1100.GREENLNK.NET with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.2499); Tue, 9 Dec 2008 15:03:54 +0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.5
Content-class: urn:content-classes:message
MIME-Version: 1.0
Date: Tue, 09 Dec 2008 15:03:54 -0000
Message-ID: <ABE739C5ADAC9A41ACCC72DF366B719D01652A14@GLKMS2100.GREENLNK.NET>
In-Reply-To: <FEE327D3-70CE-4413-A366-DAC019C98BC5@cisco.com>
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
Thread-Topic: [Roll] Working Group LastCall:draft-ietf-roll-protocols-survey-02
Thread-Index: AclaDecpVS6R5cs/TA+ckuZYghzkkQAAHB1w
References: <7C1A2E64-C1B0-472E-B354-77F290BBC80D@cisco.com><374005f30812050849refe8122i63629f469f8ba7c8@mail.gmail.com><7471DA6B-7B09-42BB-8291-C30C83576295@cs.stanford.edu><ABE739C5ADAC9A41ACCC72DF366B719D01652699@GLKMS2100.GREENLNK.NET><E3A7879D-2DE9-49C4-9A27-15EF211E8ADA@thomasclausen.org><be8c8d780812090102y19e0183exf5ab52f95d867558@mail.gmail.com><C0F7A80F-326F-4072-B29F-524B37013405@cisco.com><be8c8d780812090354v4e60dfc0xc3454e8890837e94@mail.gmail.com> <FEE327D3-70CE-4413-A366-DAC019C98BC5@cisco.com>
From: "Dearlove, Christopher (UK)" <chris.dearlove@baesystems.com>
To: JP Vasseur <jvasseur@cisco.com>, Emmanuel Baccelli <emmanuel.baccelli@inria.fr>
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 09 Dec 2008 15:03:54.0529 (UTC) FILETIME=[5A736110:01C95A0F]
Cc: roll@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [Roll] Working Group LastCall:draft-ietf-roll-protocols-survey-02
X-BeenThere: roll@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
List-Id: Routing Over Low power and Lossy networks <roll.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/roll>, <mailto:roll-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/pipermail/roll>
List-Post: <mailto:roll@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:roll-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/roll>, <mailto:roll-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: roll-bounces@ietf.org
Errors-To: roll-bounces@ietf.org

> 2- There is clearly a need for a solution *today*: look at all other
> (deployed) non IP solutions out there 
 
> 4- We are not talking about a "dream protocol": again this is very
> much realistic since solutions do exist today (not IP unfortunately
:-( ....)

Can you point me to an existing (doesn't have to be IP) protocol
that passes all five of the ID's tests, without some major drawback
in some other area. I for one would find it interesting and useful.
(Obviously it would have to have a specification, not just a claim
made about a proprietary protocol.)

If one or more such protocols exist, I don't see why they aren't
discussed at this stage.

********************************************************************
This email and any attachments are confidential to the intended
recipient and may also be privileged. If you are not the intended
recipient please delete it from your system and notify the sender.
You should not copy it or use it for any purpose nor disclose or
distribute its contents to any other person.
********************************************************************

_______________________________________________
Roll mailing list
Roll@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/roll

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email