[e2e] Discrete IP - retake
Pars Mutaf
pars.mutaf at gmail.com
Tue Sep 18 06:55:08 PDT 2012
On Tue, Sep 18, 2012 at 3:25 PM, Jon Crowcroft
<Jon.Crowcroft at cl.cam.ac.uk>wrote:
> I'm not saying you need to go to a conference or journal, except from the
> point of view of finding out what else is going on (which is a lot)
>
> note a lot of the papers these people write are not just "academic" - the
> pointers I have are to groups who work with industry - for example, with
> ISPs, router vendors, cloud service providers, and the papers I prefer to
> mention are not just "paper" studies or simulations, but involve real code
> (just like the IETF, and just like vendors)
>
> the trilogy project is probabl a good example of how to work with a bunch
> of different types of groups, and has delivered work into the IETF which
> could see real deployment (first off in mobile devices and data centers,
> then more widely spread) - its also a great example of how much "heavy
> lifting" you have to do to get from a Great Idea, to getting a lot of
> people on your side and trying things out, and doing all the
> implementation, testing, deployment, debugging, re-deployment etc etc
>
>
Yes. That's what I am doing in my way. I want to understand first what we
want exactly. I don't want to find out this alone in my office. The work is
more
important than my name.
Is there a real need for more IP space in the first place for example?
NATs are working well. Why optimizing NAT traversal is not a better
solution
until someone gets a better idea 50 years later, etc.
> IPv6 is/was, in my view, another example of such a massive effort and
> although it is flawed (it was the result of a compromise between two better
> proposals which were each potentially much easier to deploy, but polarised
> people, and the solution was one of (in my opinion) the great failings of
> the IETF when it agreed to combine them (a committee type decision) rather
> than just do both and see which got out most. (the two, if you want ancient
> history, were Steve's IP and Paul's IP (actually, those aren't their real
> names, but that's who they came from) - the simple internet protocol had 64
> bit addresses and everything else prety miuch the same - PIP had FTIFs
> which afforded ultrafast switching and really scalable source routing...
>
> oh well....luckly we didn't pick CLNP+NSAP (which nearly happened)
>
>
Thanks, I wasn't there but I think they were just hyperactive. They did not
even
think about calming down and allowing others do to research on IP. (their
goal is
to use IPv6 on *everything*)
> In missive <
> CACQuieayXDJ2A+BPS009ZN04nz6iy7pYzPBmv+_wtjCqYzFnVA at mail.gmail.com>, Par
> s Mutaf typed:
>
> >>Hi Jon,
> >>
> >>I at last solved the puzzle and understood the real meaning of your
> >>message:
> >>
> >>You are basically telling to me to go to a conference or journal. :-)
> >>
> >>No problem but we cannot discuss it here publicly? I am not interested
> in
> >>author-based research. All these people do research but they never
> discuss
> >>publicly.
> >>http://www.content-based-science.org/
> >>
> >>The first question that we need to answer is what we want, before
> proposing
> >>solutions.
> >>I argue that we need a dirty and happy Internet where everybody do what
> >>they wish.
> >>All these folks should be able to implement what they wish and be
> reachable
> >>to others.
> >>
> >>All of them are correct.
> >>
> >>Thanks
> >>
> >>On Tue, Sep 18, 2012 at 1:30 PM, Jon Crowcroft
> >><Jon.Crowcroft at cl.cam.ac.uk>wrote:
> >>
> >>> as i said, read the paper we published in sigcomm future network
> >>> architectures nearly 10 years ago
> >>> http://www.cs.ubc.ca/~andy/papers/plutarch-fdna.pdf
> >>>
> >>> no one in the IETF says you can't run multiple versions of IP
> >>> and build interworking points that copy payloads , if you so wish -
> >>> actually, there's a lot of this going on in middleboxes one way and
> another
> >>> already
> >>>
> >>> you need to propose how you find the right place to do the
> translation of
> >>> headers - this requires some sort of overlay control plane and might
> ential
> >>> the use of a new overlay meta-addressing system or make use of name
> >>> spaces as in IPNL or related work on I^3
> >>> http://128.232.0.20/teaching/0910/R02/papers/ipnl.pdf
> >>> http://www.cs.rice.edu/Conferences/IPTPS02/166.pdf
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> many of the ways IPv4/IPv6 interworking have also tackled this, not
> just
> >>> using tunnels or tunnel brokers, but lots of other techniques
> >>>
> >>> there are LOTS and LOTS of papers in the future internet research
> >>> programmes around the world on how to do this ad solve other practical
> >>> problems - see work in the IETF on ILNP for example
> >>> http://ilnp.cs.st-andrews.ac.uk/
> >>>
> >>> e2e is just one discussion place - the future internet research
> programmes
> >>> have moved a long way beyond the necessary and insufficienct business
> of
> >>> deploying IPv6 as fast and as widely as possible, and on to tackling a
> >>> bunch of new problems (Information centric networking, for example, or
> >>> massive scale internet of things and sensors etc etc)
> >>>
> >>> communities of interest for that include conferences such as ACM
> Sigcomm
> >>> and Usenix NSDI and IEEE Infocom and many others...
> >>>
> >>> ideas like XIA (see recent FIA report
> >>>
> >>>
> http://www.nets-fia.net/Meetings/May11/May%202011%20meeting%20report%203-1.pdf
> >>> amongst oterhs) go way beyond identifiers for end points and have
> entire
> >>> DAGs coded in packets (efficiently)
> >>>
> >>> there's so much exciting new stuff out there....
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> on the other hand, practical barriers to deploying lots of different
> stuff
> >>> exist, not just in the slowness/ossified internet core IPv4 routers,
> but in
> >>> the many weird boxes nearer the edges - see the Trilogy project
> >>> folks' paper on
> >>> How Hard Can It Be? Designing and Implementing a Deployable Multipath
> TCP
> >>> at
> >>>
> https://www.usenix.org/conference/nsdi12/tech-schedule/technical-sessions
> >>>
> >>> and also in same conference session, the cunning tricks the Yale
> folks had
> >>> to empoy to get small changes into TCP:
> >>> Fitting Square Pegs Through Round Pipes: Unordered Delivery
> Wire-Compatible
> >>> with TCP and TLS
> >>>
> >>> In missive <CACQuieYAU+O1bXYdM+ZJsknXE=
> >>> 8wPgzftOxKJ73Mshxu2Dtc6A at mail.gmail.com>, Par
> >>> s Mutaf typed:
> >>>
> >>> >>--047d7b4140c626654d04c9f67a1c
> >>> >>Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
> >>> >>
> >>> >>Off-list messages that I received indicate to me that I was not
> taken
> >>> >>seriously
> >>> >>because I am too modest. I was called a troll and hobbyist. I have
> in
> >>> fact
> >>> >>a PhD in
> >>> >>computer science from INRIA, France. I am now an asst prof. in
> Turkey.
> >>> >>But I let go my PhD title because my thinking evolved beyond your
> >>> >>imagination ;-).
> >>> >>Check and support my project (off-list please this is off-topic):
> >>> >>
> >>> >>http://www.content-based-science.org/
> >>> >>
> >>> >>What is important is the content. Not the name.
> >>> >>
> >>> >>Now back to our topic. IPng was clearly designed the wrong way.
> Now read
> >>> >>the
> >>> >>message again, this is the result of 15 years thinking:
> >>> >>-----
> >>> >>
> >>> >>Dear colleagues,
> >>> >>
> >>> >>I believe that the next step in IP's evolution would not be IPv6.
> It
> >>> would
> >>> >>be "Discrete IP" allowing any IP version.
> >>> >>I concluded that Discrete IP better respects the end-to-end
> principles
> >>> >>therefore it is economically more viable.
> >>> >>
> >>> >>***Do not touch the existing Internet, do not assume that IPv6 is
> the
> >>> end of
> >>> >>centuries of research.***
> >>> >>
> >>> >>-I propose that we do not touch the core Internet, i.e. enforce the
> >>> >>modification of all Internet routers, this is what IPv6 does.
> >>> >>-People should be free to choose the IP version that they wish
> because
> >>> >>deciding for others is a technology blocker. IETF designs IPv6,
> IETF
> >>> blocks
> >>> >>its development. Because IETF does not give freedom of choice.
> This is
> >>> not
> >>> >>normal. Some entities may use IPv6 others IPv4 yet others IPv7 for
> >>> unknown
> >>> >>reasons. Everybody may agree on IPv6, or not. We do not know. We
> do not
> >>> >>have to.
> >>> >>-To give such freedom of choice, we need to change the end-nodes,
> for
> >>> >>example TCP.
> >>> >>-This is the end-to-end principle.
> >>> >>
> >>> >>Here is a picture (in this picture we have a network of Internets
> >>> running
> >>> >>random IP versions):
> >>> >>
> >>>
> http://htmlimg4.scribdassets.com/3798kx3chs1szfhj/images/4-ce35c39dd1.jpg
> >>> >>The question is:
> >>> >>***Would this be the ideal for the Internet? Please discuss this
> >>> question
> >>> >>without entering in design challenges.***
> >>> >>
> >>> >>For more information, see my unpublished paper:
> >>> >>
> >>> >>http://www.scribd.com/doc/105448105/Discrete-IP
> >>> >>
> >>> >>Cheers,
> >>> >>Pars
> >>> >>
> >>> >>--
> >>> >>http://www.content-based-science.org
> >>> >>
> >>> >>--047d7b4140c626654d04c9f67a1c
> >>> >>Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1
> >>> >>Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
> >>> >>
> >>> >>Off-list messages that I received indicate to me that I was not
> taken
> >>> serio=
> >>> >>usly<br>because I am too modest. I was called a troll and
> hobbyist. I
> >>> have =
> >>> >>in fact a PhD in <br>computer science from INRIA, France. I am now
> an
> >>> asst =
> >>> >>prof. in Turkey. <br>
> >>> >>But I let go my PhD title because my thinking evolved beyond your
> >>> imaginati=
> >>> >>on ;-). <br>Check and support my project (off-list please this is
> >>> off-topic=
> >>> >>):<br><br><a href=3D"http://www.content-based-science.org/">
> >>> http://www.cont=
> >>> >>ent-based-science.org/</a><br>
> >>> >><br>What is important is the content. Not the name.<br><br>Now
> back to
> >>> our =
> >>> >>topic. IPng was clearly designed the wrong way. Now read the
> >>> <br>message ag=
> >>> >>ain, this is the result of 15 years thinking:<br>-----<br><br>Dear
> >>> colleagu=
> >>> >>es,<br>
> >>> >><br>I believe that the next step in IP's evolution would not be
> >>> IPv6. I=
> >>> >>t would<br>be "Discrete IP" allowing any IP version.<br>I
> >>> conclud=
> >>> >>ed that Discrete IP better respects the end-to-end
> >>> principles<br>therefore =
> >>> >>it is economically more viable.<br>
> >>> >><br>***Do not touch the existing Internet, do not assume that IPv6
> is
> >>> the e=
> >>> >>nd of<br>centuries of research.***<br><br>-I propose that we do not
> >>> touch t=
> >>> >>he core Internet, i.e. enforce the<br>modification of all Internet
> >>> routers,=
> >>> >> this is what IPv6 does.<br>
> >>> >>-People should be free to choose the IP version that they wish
> >>> because<br>d=
> >>> >>eciding for others is a technology blocker. IETF designs IPv6, IETF
> >>> blocks<=
> >>> >>br>its development. Because IETF does not give freedom of choice.
> This
> >>> is n=
> >>> >>ot<br>
> >>> >>normal. Some entities may use IPv6 others IPv4 yet others IPv7 for
> >>> unknown<=
> >>> >>br>reasons. Everybody may agree on IPv6, or not. We do not know.
> We do
> >>> not<=
> >>> >>br>have to.<br>-To give such freedom of choice, we need to change
> the
> >>> end-n=
> >>> >>odes, for<br>
> >>> >>example TCP.<br>-This is the end-to-end principle.<br><br>Here is a
> >>> picture=
> >>> >> (in this picture we have a network of Internets running<br>random
> IP
> >>> versi=
> >>> >>ons):<br><a href=3D"
> >>> http://htmlimg4.scribdassets.com/3798kx3chs1szfhj/image=
> >>> >>s/4-ce35c39dd1.jpg">
> >>> http://htmlimg4.scribdassets.com/3798kx3chs1szfhj/image=
> >>> >>s/4-ce35c39dd1.jpg</a><br>
> >>> >>The question is:<br>***Would this be the ideal for the Internet?
> Please
> >>> dis=
> >>> >>cuss this question<br>without entering in design
> >>> challenges.***<br><br>For =
> >>> >>more information, see my unpublished paper:<br><br><a href=3D"
> >>> http://www.sc=
> >>> >>ribd.com/doc/105448105/Discrete-IP">
> >>> http://www.scribd.com/doc/105448105/Dis=
> >>> >>crete-IP</a><br>
> >>> >><br>Cheers,<br>Pars<br clear=3D"all"><br>-- <br><a href=3D"
> >>> http://www.conte=
> >>> >>nt-based-science.org" target=3D"_blank">
> >>> http://www.content-based-science.or=
> >>> >>g</a><br><br>
> >>> >>
> >>> >>--047d7b4140c626654d04c9f67a1c--
> >>>
> >>> cheers
> >>>
> >>> jon
> >>>
> >>>
> >>
> >>
> >>--
> >>http://www.content-based-science.org
> >>
> >>--047d7bae44c8472c4304c9f8c72f
> >>Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1
> >>Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
> >>
> >>Hi Jon, <br><br>I at last solved the puzzle and understood the real
> meaning=
> >> of your message: <br><br>You are basically telling to me to go to a
> confer=
> >>ence or journal. :-)<br><br>No problem but we cannot discuss it here
> public=
> >>ly? I am not interested in <br>
> >>author-based research. All these people do research but they never
> discuss =
> >>publicly. <br><a href=3D"http://www.content-based-science.org/">
> http://www.=
> >>content-based-science.org/</a><br><br>The first question that we need
> to an=
> >>swer is what we want, before proposing solutions.<br>
> >>I argue that we need a dirty and happy Internet where everybody do what
> the=
> >>y wish. <br>All these folks should be able to implement what they wish
> and =
> >>be reachable to others. <br><br>All of them are correct.
> <br><br>Thanks<br>
> >><br><div class=3D"gmail_quote">On Tue, Sep 18, 2012 at 1:30 PM, Jon
> Crowcro=
> >>ft <span dir=3D"ltr"><<a href=3D"mailto:Jon.Crowcroft at cl.cam.ac.uk"
> targ=
> >>et=3D"_blank">Jon.Crowcroft at cl.cam.ac.uk</a>></span>
> wrote:<br><blockquo=
> >>te class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px
> #ccc so=
> >>lid;padding-left:1ex">
> >>as i said, read the paper we published in sigcomm future network<br>
> >>architectures nearly 10 years ago<br>
> >><a href=3D"http://www.cs.ubc.ca/%7Eandy/papers/plutarch-fdna.pdf"
> target=3D=
> >>"_blank">http://www.cs.ubc.ca/~andy/papers/plutarch-fdna.pdf</a><br>
> >><br>
> >>no one in the IETF says you can't run multiple versions of IP<br>
> >>and build interworking points that copy payloads , if you so wish -<br>
> >>actually, there's a lot of this going on in middleboxes one way and
> ano=
> >>ther<br>
> >>already<br>
> >><br>
> >>you need to propose how you find the right place to do the translation
> of<b=
> >>r>
> >>headers - this requires some sort of overlay control plane and might
> ential=
> >><br>
> >>the use of a new overlay meta-addressing system or make =A0use of
> name<br>
> >>spaces as in IPNL or related work on I^3<br>
> >><a href=3D"http://128.232.0.20/teaching/0910/R02/papers/ipnl.pdf"
> target=3D=
> >>"_blank">http://128.232.0.20/teaching/0910/R02/papers/ipnl.pdf</a><br>
> >><a href=3D"http://www.cs.rice.edu/Conferences/IPTPS02/166.pdf"
> target=3D"_b=
> >>lank">http://www.cs.rice.edu/Conferences/IPTPS02/166.pdf</a><br>
> >><br>
> >><br>
> >>many of the ways IPv4/IPv6 interworking have also tackled this, not
> just<br=
> >>>
> >>using tunnels or tunnel brokers, but lots of other techniques<br>
> >><br>
> >>there are LOTS and LOTS of papers in the future internet research<br>
> >>programmes around the world on how to do this ad solve other
> practical<br>
> >>problems - see work in the IETF on ILNP for example<br>
> >><a href=3D"http://ilnp.cs.st-andrews.ac.uk/" target=3D"_blank">
> http://ilnp.=
> >>cs.st-andrews.ac.uk/</a><br>
> >><br>
> >>e2e is just one discussion place - the future internet research
> programmes<=
> >>br>
> >>have moved a long way beyond the necessary and insufficienct business
> of<br=
> >>>
> >>deploying IPv6 as fast and as widely as possible, and on to tackling
> a<br>
> >>bunch of new problems (Information centric networking, for example,
> or<br>
> >>massive scale internet of things and sensors etc etc)<br>
> >><br>
> >>communities of interest for that include conferences such as ACM
> Sigcomm<br=
> >>>
> >>and Usenix NSDI and IEEE Infocom and many others...<br>
> >><br>
> >>ideas like XIA (see recent FIA report<br>
> >><a href=3D"
> http://www.nets-fia.net/Meetings/May11/May%202011%20meeting%20re=
> >>port%203-1.pdf" target=3D"_blank">
> http://www.nets-fia.net/Meetings/May11/Ma=
> >>y%202011%20meeting%20report%203-1.pdf</a><br>
> >>amongst oterhs) go way beyond identifiers for end points and have
> entire<br=
> >>>
> >>DAGs coded in packets (efficiently)<br>
> >><br>
> >>there's so much exciting new stuff out there....<br>
> >><br>
> >><br>
> >>on the other hand, practical barriers to deploying lots of different
> stuff<=
> >>br>
> >>exist, not just in the slowness/ossified internet core IPv4 routers,
> but in=
> >><br>
> >>the many weird boxes nearer the edges - see the Trilogy project<br>
> >>folks' paper on<br>
> >>How Hard Can It Be? Designing and Implementing a Deployable Multipath
> TCP<b=
> >>r>
> >>at<br>
> >><a href=3D"
> https://www.usenix.org/conference/nsdi12/tech-schedule/technical=
> >>-sessions" target=3D"_blank">
> https://www.usenix.org/conference/nsdi12/tech-=
> >>schedule/technical-sessions</a><br>
> >><br>
> >>and also in same conference session, the cunning tricks the Yale folks
> had<=
> >>br>
> >>to empoy to get small changes into TCP:<br>
> >>Fitting Square Pegs Through Round Pipes: Unordered Delivery
> Wire-Compatible=
> >><br>
> >>with TCP and TLS<br>
> >><br>
> >>In missive <CACQuieYAU+O1bXYdM+ZJsknXE=3D<a href=3D"mailto:
> 8wPgzftOxKJ73=
> >>Mshxu2Dtc6A at mail.gmail.com">8wPgzftOxKJ73Mshxu2Dtc6A at mail.gmail.com
> </a>>=
> >>, Par<br>
> >>s Mutaf typed:<br>
> >><br>
> >>=A0>>--047d7b4140c626654d04c9f67a1c<br>
> >>=A0>>Content-Type: text/plain; charset=3DISO-8859-1<br>
> >><div><div class=3D"h5">=A0>><br>
> >>=A0>>Off-list messages that I received indicate to me that I was
> not =
> >>taken<br>
> >>=A0>>seriously<br>
> >>=A0>>because I am too modest. I was called a troll and hobbyist.
> I ha=
> >>ve in fact<br>
> >>=A0>>a PhD in<br>
> >>=A0>>computer science from INRIA, France. I am now an asst prof.
> in T=
> >>urkey.<br>
> >>=A0>>But I let go my PhD title because my thinking evolved beyond
> you=
> >>r<br>
> >>=A0>>imagination ;-).<br>
> >>=A0>>Check and support my project (off-list please this is
> off-topic)=
> >>:<br>
> >>=A0>><br>
> >>=A0>><a href=3D"http://www.content-based-science.org/"
> target=3D"_bla=
> >>nk">http://www.content-based-science.org/</a><br>
> >>=A0>><br>
> >>=A0>>What is important is the content. Not the name.<br>
> >>=A0>><br>
> >>=A0>>Now back to our topic. IPng was clearly designed the wrong
> way. =
> >>Now read<br>
> >>=A0>>the<br>
> >>=A0>>message again, this is the result of 15 years thinking:<br>
> >>=A0>>-----<br>
> >>=A0>><br>
> >>=A0>>Dear colleagues,<br>
> >>=A0>><br>
> >>=A0>>I believe that the next step in IP's evolution would not
> be =
> >>IPv6. It would<br>
> >>=A0>>be "Discrete IP" allowing any IP version.<br>
> >>=A0>>I concluded that Discrete IP better respects the end-to-end
> prin=
> >>ciples<br>
> >>=A0>>therefore it is economically more viable.<br>
> >>=A0>><br>
> >>=A0>>***Do not touch the existing Internet, do not assume that
> IPv6 i=
> >>s the end of<br>
> >>=A0>>centuries of research.***<br>
> >>=A0>><br>
> >>=A0>>-I propose that we do not touch the core Internet, i.e.
> enforce =
> >>the<br>
> >>=A0>>modification of all Internet routers, this is what IPv6
> does.<br=
> >>>
> >>=A0>>-People should be free to choose the IP version that they
> wish b=
> >>ecause<br>
> >>=A0>>deciding for others is a technology blocker. IETF designs
> IPv6, =
> >>IETF blocks<br>
> >>=A0>>its development. Because IETF does not give freedom of
> choice. T=
> >>his is not<br>
> >>=A0>>normal. Some entities may use IPv6 others IPv4 yet others
> IPv7 f=
> >>or unknown<br>
> >>=A0>>reasons. Everybody may agree on IPv6, or not. We do not
> know. We=
> >> do not<br>
> >>=A0>>have to.<br>
> >>=A0>>-To give such freedom of choice, we need to change the
> end-nodes=
> >>, for<br>
> >>=A0>>example TCP.<br>
> >>=A0>>-This is the end-to-end principle.<br>
> >>=A0>><br>
> >>=A0>>Here is a picture (in this picture we have a network of
> Internet=
> >>s running<br>
> >>=A0>>random IP versions):<br>
> >>=A0>><a href=3D"
> http://htmlimg4.scribdassets.com/3798kx3chs1szfhj/ima=
> >>ges/4-ce35c39dd1.jpg" target=3D"_blank">
> http://htmlimg4.scribdassets.com/37=
> >>98kx3chs1szfhj/images/4-ce35c39dd1.jpg</a><br>
> >>=A0>>The question is:<br>
> >>=A0>>***Would this be the ideal for the Internet? Please discuss
> this=
> >> question<br>
> >>=A0>>without entering in design challenges.***<br>
> >>=A0>><br>
> >>=A0>>For more information, see my unpublished paper:<br>
> >>=A0>><br>
> >>=A0>><a href=3D"http://www.scribd.com/doc/105448105/Discrete-IP"
> targ=
> >>et=3D"_blank">http://www.scribd.com/doc/105448105/Discrete-IP</a><br>
> >>=A0>><br>
> >>=A0>>Cheers,<br>
> >>=A0>>Pars<br>
> >>=A0>><br>
> >>=A0>>--<br>
> >>=A0>><a href=3D"http://www.content-based-science.org"
> target=3D"_blan=
> >>k">http://www.content-based-science.org</a><br>
> >>=A0>><br>
> >></div></div>=A0>>--047d7b4140c626654d04c9f67a1c<br>
> >>=A0>>Content-Type: text/html; charset=3DISO-8859-1<br>
> >>=A0>>Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable<br>
> >>=A0>><br>
> >>=A0>>Off-list messages that I received indicate to me that I was
> not =
> >>taken serio=3D<br>
> >>=A0>>usly<br>because I am too modest. I was called a troll
> and =
> >>hobbyist. I have =3D<br>
> >>=A0>>in fact a PhD in <br>computer science from INRIA,
> France. =
> >>I am now an asst =3D<br>
> >>=A0>>prof. in Turkey. <br><br>
> >>=A0>>But I let go my PhD title because my thinking evolved beyond
> you=
> >>r imaginati=3D<br>
> >>=A0>>on ;-). <br>Check and support my project (off-list
> please =
> >>this is off-topic=3D<br>
> >>=A0>>):<br><br><a href=3D3D"<a href=3D"
> http://www=
> >>.content-based-science.org/" target=3D"_blank">
> http://www.content-based-sci=
> >>ence.org/</a>"><a href=3D"http://www.cont"
> target=3D"_blank">http:/=
> >>/www.cont</a>=3D<br>
> >>
> >>=A0>><a href=3D"http://ent-based-science.org/"
> target=3D"_blank">ent-=
> >>based-science.org/</a></a><br><br>
> >>=A0>><br>What is important is the content. Not the
> name.<br&=
> >>gt;<br>Now back to our =3D<br>
> >>=A0>>topic. IPng was clearly designed the wrong way. Now read the
> <=
> >>;br>message ag=3D<br>
> >>=A0>>ain, this is the result of 15 years
> thinking:<br>-----<=
> >>br><br>Dear colleagu=3D<br>
> >>=A0>>es,<br><br>
> >>=A0>><br>I believe that the next step in IP&#39;s
> evolution=
> >> would not be IPv6. I=3D<br>
> >>=A0>>t would<br>be &quot;Discrete IP&quot; allowing
> any=
> >> IP version.<br>I conclud=3D<br>
> >>=A0>>ed that Discrete IP better respects the end-to-end
> principles<=
> >>;br>therefore =3D<br>
> >>=A0>>it is economically more viable.<br><br>
> >>=A0>><br>***Do not touch the existing Internet, do not
> assume t=
> >>hat IPv6 is the e=3D<br>
> >>=A0>>nd of<br>centuries of
> research.***<br><br>-I p=
> >>ropose that we do not touch t=3D<br>
> >>=A0>>he core Internet, i.e. enforce the<br>modification of
> all =
> >>Internet routers,=3D<br>
> >>=A0>> this is what IPv6 does.<br><br>
> >>=A0>>-People should be free to choose the IP version that they
> wish b=
> >>ecause<br>d=3D<br>
> >>=A0>>eciding for others is a technology blocker. IETF designs
> IPv6, I=
> >>ETF blocks<=3D<br>
> >>=A0>>br>its development. Because IETF does not give freedom of
> cho=
> >>ice. This is n=3D<br>
> >>=A0>>ot<br><br>
> >>=A0>>normal. Some entities may use IPv6 others IPv4 yet others
> IPv7 f=
> >>or unknown<=3D<br>
> >>=A0>>br>reasons. Everybody may agree on IPv6, or not. We do
> not kn=
> >>ow. We do not<=3D<br>
> >>=A0>>br>have to.<br>-To give such freedom of choice, we
> need=
> >> to change the end-n=3D<br>
> >>=A0>>odes, for<br><br>
> >>=A0>>example TCP.<br>-This is the end-to-end
> principle.<br&g=
> >>t;<br>Here is a picture=3D<br>
> >>=A0>> (in this picture we have a network of Internets
> running<br&g=
> >>t;random IP versi=3D<br>
> >>=A0>>ons):<br><a href=3D3D"<a href=3D"
> http://htmlimg4.s=
> >>cribdassets.com/3798kx3chs1szfhj/image=3D" target=3D"_blank">
> http://htmlimg=
> >>4.scribdassets.com/3798kx3chs1szfhj/image=3D</a><br>
> >>=A0>>s/4-ce35c39dd1.jpg"><a href=3D"
> http://htmlimg4.scribdass=
> >>ets.com/3798kx3chs1szfhj/image=3D" target=3D"_blank">
> http://htmlimg4.scribd=
> >>assets.com/3798kx3chs1szfhj/image=3D</a><br>
> >>=A0>>s/4-ce35c39dd1.jpg</a><br><br>
> >>=A0>>The question is:<br>***Would this be the ideal for the
> Int=
> >>ernet? Please dis=3D<br>
> >>=A0>>cuss this question<br>without entering in design
> challenge=
> >>s.***<br><br>For =3D<br>
> >>=A0>>more information, see my unpublished
> paper:<br><br>&=
> >>lt;a href=3D3D"<a href=3D"http://www.sc" target=3D"_blank">
> http://www.=
> >>sc</a>=3D<br>
> >>=A0>><a href=3D"http://ribd.com/doc/105448105/Discrete-IP"
> target=3D"=
> >>_blank">ribd.com/doc/105448105/Discrete-IP</a>"><a href=3D"
> http://w=
> >>ww.scribd.com/doc/105448105/Dis=3D" target=3D"_blank">
> http://www.scribd.com=
> >>/doc/105448105/Dis=3D</a><br>
> >>
> >>=A0>>crete-IP</a><br><br>
> >>=A0>><br>Cheers,<br>Pars<br
> clear=3D3D"all"&=
> >>gt;<br>-- <br><a href=3D3D"<a href=3D"
> http://www.conte"=
> >> target=3D"_blank">http://www.conte</a>=3D<br>
> >>=A0>><a href=3D"http://nt-based-science.org"
> target=3D"_blank">nt-bas=
> >>ed-science.org</a>" target=3D3D"_blank"><a
> href=3D"http:/=
> >>/www.content-based-science.or" target=3D"_blank">
> http://www.content-based-s=
> >>cience.or</a>=3D<br>
> >>
> >>=A0>>g</a><br><br><br>
> >>=A0>><br>
> >>=A0>>--047d7b4140c626654d04c9f67a1c--<br>
> >><br>
> >>=A0cheers<br>
> >><span class=3D"HOEnZb"><font color=3D"#888888"><br>
> >>=A0 =A0jon<br>
> >><br>
> >></font></span></blockquote></div><br><br clear=3D"all"><br>-- <br><a
> href=
> >>=3D"http://www.content-based-science.org" target=3D"_blank">
> http://www.cont=
> >>ent-based-science.org</a><br><br>
> >>
> >>--047d7bae44c8472c4304c9f8c72f--
>
> cheers
>
> jon
>
>
--
http://www.content-based-science.org
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://mailman.postel.org/pipermail/end2end-interest/attachments/20120918/11c2e6ec/attachment-0001.html
More information about the end2end-interest
mailing list