Re: [rrg] Point of order
Dino Farinacci <dino@cisco.com> Wed, 15 April 2009 18:34 UTC
Return-Path: <dino@cisco.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 C9BFA3A6B07 for <rrg@core3.amsl.com>; Wed, 15 Apr 2009 11:34:59 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -6.599
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[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 Gve7fheH0j3s for <rrg@core3.amsl.com>; Wed, 15 Apr 2009 11:34:59 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from sj-iport-3.cisco.com (sj-iport-3.cisco.com [171.71.176.72]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D23753A68E0 for <rrg@irtf.org>; Wed, 15 Apr 2009 11:34:57 -0700 (PDT)
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.40,193,1238976000"; d="scan'208";a="153634979"
Received: from sj-dkim-4.cisco.com ([171.71.179.196]) by sj-iport-3.cisco.com with ESMTP; 15 Apr 2009 18:35:53 +0000
Received: from sj-core-1.cisco.com (sj-core-1.cisco.com [171.71.177.237]) by sj-dkim-4.cisco.com (8.12.11/8.12.11) with ESMTP id n3FIZqN9007127; Wed, 15 Apr 2009 11:35:52 -0700
Received: from xbh-sjc-221.amer.cisco.com (xbh-sjc-221.cisco.com [128.107.191.63]) by sj-core-1.cisco.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id n3FIZqPr013519; Wed, 15 Apr 2009 18:35:52 GMT
Received: from xfe-sjc-212.amer.cisco.com ([171.70.151.187]) by xbh-sjc-221.amer.cisco.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.1830); Wed, 15 Apr 2009 11:35:52 -0700
Received: from dhcp-171-71-55-200.cisco.com ([171.71.55.200]) by xfe-sjc-212.amer.cisco.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.1830); Wed, 15 Apr 2009 11:35:51 -0700
Message-Id: <9D086BFD-8766-49E4-BFBA-829151977439@cisco.com>
From: Dino Farinacci <dino@cisco.com>
To: Xiaoliang Zhao <xleonzhao@gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <4e913c5d0904150755s337be9f8t90b42e66d84daf3d@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"; format="flowed"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v930.4)
Date: Wed, 15 Apr 2009 11:36:00 -0700
References: <49DD6DD2.3060105@tony.li> <49E555A3.80502@tony.li> <3c3e3fca0904142151y3ed1d026jb0d27f122eeef1ff@mail.gmail.com> <49E595F1.1080703@firstpr.com.au> <4e913c5d0904150755s337be9f8t90b42e66d84daf3d@mail.gmail.com>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.930.4)
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 15 Apr 2009 18:35:51.0733 (UTC) FILETIME=[00F4F650:01C9BDF9]
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; l=681; t=1239820552; x=1240684552; c=relaxed/simple; s=sjdkim4002; h=Content-Type:From:Subject:Content-Transfer-Encoding:MIME-Version; d=cisco.com; i=dino@cisco.com; z=From:=20Dino=20Farinacci=20<dino@cisco.com> |Subject:=20Re=3A=20[rrg]=20Point=20of=20order |Sender:=20; bh=0K/nATbt4qSDGX+SA/A+TEeQxJYbGDgMActsBNN9CSY=; b=T/M0dFNpDrykZvuNFCutm8y6sfpL9opr3ImlvwGWB3wbAXR3HH1LQcfW++ ma7Zun+UDByYM4vRe7zuWTTf6fsWah4N9oDDyOs9xTe39d4SADCMhvCBc1k3 sHmgZSLAt8;
Authentication-Results: sj-dkim-4; header.From=dino@cisco.com; dkim=pass ( sig from cisco.com/sjdkim4002 verified; );
Cc: rrg@irtf.org, Robin Whittle <rw@firstpr.com.au>
Subject: Re: [rrg] Point of order
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: Wed, 15 Apr 2009 18:34:59 -0000
>> It is a problem whose solutions are tightly bound by the need for >> compatibility with all existing hosts and most existing routers - and >> by the need to ensure immediate benefits for early adopters, since >> the solution will only work if it is voluntarily adopted by most >> end-user networks which want multihoming, portability etc. >> > I would consensus on this one. Me too. That's 3-0. Dino > > > Best, > ---- > Xiaoliang (Leon) Zhao > Sr. Network Engineer > Public IP Global Network Engineering > Verizon Business > _______________________________________________ > rrg mailing list > rrg@irtf.org > http://www.irtf.org/mailman/listinfo/rrg
- Re: [rrg] Point of order John Zwiebel
- [rrg] Point of order Tony Li
- Re: [rrg] Point of order Tony Li
- Re: [rrg] Point of order William Herrin
- Re: [rrg] Point of order Tony Li
- Re: [rrg] Point of order Robin Whittle
- Re: [rrg] Point of order Xiaoliang Zhao
- Re: [rrg] Point of order William Herrin
- Re: [rrg] Point of order Dow Street
- Re: [rrg] Point of order Dino Farinacci
- Re: [rrg] Point of order Scott Brim
- Re: [rrg] Point of order Joel M. Halpern
- Re: [rrg] Point of order RJ Atkinson
- Re: [rrg] Point of order Dow Street
- Re: [rrg] Point of order Dino Farinacci
- Re: [rrg] Point of order Tony Li
- Re: [rrg] Point of order William Herrin
- Re: [rrg] Point of order Joel M. Halpern
- Re: [rrg] Point of order Noel Chiappa
- Re: [rrg] Point of order William Herrin
- Re: [rrg] Point of order Tony Li
- Re: [rrg] IP Versions Joel M. Halpern
- Re: [rrg] Point of order - inadequate consensus p… Robin Whittle
- Re: [rrg] Point of order William Herrin
- Re: [rrg] v4 and/or v6 Tony Li
- Re: [rrg] Point of order Tony Li
- Re: [rrg] Point of order Eliot Lear
- Re: [rrg] Point of order Tony Li
- Re: [rrg] Point of order William Herrin
- Re: [rrg] Point of order William Herrin
- Re: [rrg] Point of order Eliot Lear
- Re: [rrg] v4 and/or v6 William Herrin
- Re: [rrg] Point of order William Herrin
- Re: [rrg] Point of order Eliot Lear
- Re: [rrg] v4 and/or v6 Tony Li
- Re: [rrg] Point of order Scott Brim
- Re: [rrg] Point of order - inadequate consensus p… Scott Brim
- Re: [rrg] Point of order William Herrin
- Re: [rrg] Point of order Scott Brim
- Re: [rrg] Point of order Dow Street
- Re: [rrg] Point of order RJ Atkinson
- Re: [rrg] Point of order William Herrin