[e2e] Discrete IP

[Michael Welzl]

Hi,

This discussion seems to be about "what would be good design" vs.  
pragmatic "what can we standardize and deploy now".

I think that your proposal falls in the first category, like the  
PlutArch paper that Jon Crowcroft has pointed to, and like John Day's  
book!
http://www.amazon.com/Patterns-Network-Architecture-Return-Fundamentals/
I think that this book covers a lot of what you'd like to see, in  
great detail.

In the second category, I think the IETF is doing the best it can,  
e.g. with point solutions like indeed 6lowpan and recent things  
happening in the IRTF RRG.
If you think that these solutions are not far reaching enough, why not  
make a concrete proposal?

Simply saying "the architecture is wrong, it should be X" is fine, but  
then you're in the world of research where I'd say what you propose is  
nothing new.

Cheers,
Michael


On Sep 16, 2012, at 8:36 AM, Pars Mutaf wrote:

> For those who forgot the original post, the problem that I see is:
>
> IETF is blocking technology.
>
> 1. No one should touch the existing IPv4 Internet (except those who  
> run it)
> 2. IPv6 cannot be deployed
> 3. IPv6 means IP research is done. This is very harmful.
>
> IETF's role is not making design decisions for others, it is  
> ***enabling new technology***.
>
>
> On Sun, Sep 16, 2012 at 9:15 AM, Pars Mutaf <pars.mutaf at gmail.com>  
> wrote:
> Hi Ross,
>
> This is off topic no?
>
> Thanks,
>
> On Sun, Sep 16, 2012 at 8:08 AM, Ross Finlayson  
> <finlayson at live555.com> wrote:
>>>     > Even better, perhaps professional mailing
>>> lists like this should start
>>>     > rejecting postings from 'hobbyist' email
>>> addresses ("@gmail.com",
>>>     > "@yahoo.com", etc.)...
>>>
>>> Sigh, much as I basically agree with you, a number of our
>>> serious contributors
>>> also use gmail, etc, these days.
>>>
>> Not to mention the PhD students who wouldn't like to be excluded ;-)
>
> Do these PhD students' schools not have their own domain name? :-)
>
> Note that it's possible to let gmail manage email to/from addresses  
> that use other domain names.  See:http://productforums.google.com/forum/#!topic/ 
> gmail/tEaJstfhzeI
>
> The problem is not the 'gmail' service per se (provided that you  
> don't mind your email being scanned :-).  The problem is the  
> "@gmail.com" email address suffix, which advertises to the world  
> that you're not particularly relevant.  (Ditto for "@yahoo.com",  
> "@hotmail.com", "@aol.com" addresses, etc.)
>
> Ross.
>
>
>
>
> -- 
> http://www.content-based-science.org
>
>
>
>
> -- 
> http://www.content-based-science.org
>