From lars@netapp.com Tue Feb 4 03:02:15 2014 Return-Path: X-Original-To: rrg@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: rrg@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D64F91A03E4 for ; Tue, 4 Feb 2014 03:02:15 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.437 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.437 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.535, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id VrFcW5GjEYQd for ; Tue, 4 Feb 2014 03:02:14 -0800 (PST) Received: from mx11.netapp.com (mx11.netapp.com [216.240.18.76]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id BAA631A039E for ; Tue, 4 Feb 2014 03:02:14 -0800 (PST) X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.95,778,1384329600"; d="asc'?scan'208";a="99936691" Received: from vmwexceht03-prd.hq.netapp.com ([10.106.76.241]) by mx11-out.netapp.com with ESMTP; 04 Feb 2014 03:02:13 -0800 Received: from SACEXCMBX01-PRD.hq.netapp.com ([169.254.2.211]) by vmwexceht03-prd.hq.netapp.com ([10.106.76.241]) with mapi id 14.03.0123.003; Tue, 4 Feb 2014 03:02:13 -0800 From: "Eggert, Lars" To: "rrg@irtf.org" Thread-Topic: [rrg] Rebooting the RRG Thread-Index: AQHO4UUNo0vElbAGd0SVhro/WnUq0Jql9KwA Date: Tue, 4 Feb 2014 11:02:12 +0000 Message-ID: <5BB6C63B-4C53-4552-991D-AB50B2E66247@netapp.com> References: <5B131180-FA93-4A05-B3BE-3A23767EBD9D@netapp.com> In-Reply-To: <5B131180-FA93-4A05-B3BE-3A23767EBD9D@netapp.com> Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: yes X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: x-originating-ip: [10.106.53.51] Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="Apple-Mail=_FE98EF81-8231-4507-B162-D52D064196DD"; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; micalg=pgp-sha1 MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: [rrg] Rebooting the RRG X-BeenThere: rrg@irtf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: IRTF Routing Research Group List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 04 Feb 2014 11:02:15 -0000 --Apple-Mail=_FE98EF81-8231-4507-B162-D52D064196DD Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Hi, so it looks like the effort to reboot the RRG has fizzled out, since we = didn't manage to get critical mass for a meeting in London. That's not a = good sign. I'm happy to have a conversation on the list or face-to-face in London = about the future of the group; at the moment, my inclination is to close = it in the near future, since we seem to have run out of steam. Lars --Apple-Mail=_FE98EF81-8231-4507-B162-D52D064196DD Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="signature.asc" Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" Content-Description: Message signed with OpenPGP using GPGMail -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- iQCVAwUBUvDIstZcnpRveo1xAQL28AQAoyoyy1kYNx0qjNfJHtRPcwFa+agaB00X lPn2fkEj0Tft8pqRz9XgsKq5A5FrYUgYoaBza4/FLlA+S1xUK+siW7tgay7tJ2Gk mYJ62e9jfaII6pSE5lhTsdnRWURrCI/V5dirw5KrhBdZM2qpmAV9SD42T6+TAjEj B7QGphgmWs0= =QEvs -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --Apple-Mail=_FE98EF81-8231-4507-B162-D52D064196DD-- From scott.brim@gmail.com Tue Feb 4 08:30:31 2014 Return-Path: X-Original-To: rrg@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: rrg@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 12F1D1A0199 for ; Tue, 4 Feb 2014 08:30:31 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 980M9PJqPssD for ; Tue, 4 Feb 2014 08:30:29 -0800 (PST) Received: from mail-oa0-x230.google.com (mail-oa0-x230.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4003:c02::230]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8F0201A0195 for ; Tue, 4 Feb 2014 08:30:28 -0800 (PST) Received: by mail-oa0-f48.google.com with SMTP id l6so9928294oag.7 for ; Tue, 04 Feb 2014 08:30:28 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc:content-type; bh=tlvQoxIpyX9SHllQIucDsTq3fsv+fD8x5LungZehZSc=; b=TDxQmTZqE/SywWdBz0aB2/V3+9moef+Y9xk52fs7MfzPOIXLNhRbrmDjpoXeRFmmrw jed0EU4cznPObHbQqYLLX6uCDkAjQfkmgvScgLau4tXG2yQk9PzWc67SBRCydIqKDFYP ZJ6JCiajOpXHsax3/lhANp0lCx38aJF6zi/fHAFkELfo6mhMKByV4q0d5O/RY/I6laZr 1r/5IsTpTMd1bNtwaJOadlSx8711q8DM9ggZMFmJqte1jSavQ3J0ID013OD/CJC+hD1z id4guE4uzdS5v7Tg+dn553d3DOnZdJvXGNJaiz0nSUJ81qPbjAiJTTbu6K1Ca6U2L63u 2r/A== X-Received: by 10.182.153.226 with SMTP id vj2mr37151651obb.26.1391531428020; Tue, 04 Feb 2014 08:30:28 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.182.48.9 with HTTP; Tue, 4 Feb 2014 08:30:07 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: <5BB6C63B-4C53-4552-991D-AB50B2E66247@netapp.com> References: <5B131180-FA93-4A05-B3BE-3A23767EBD9D@netapp.com> <5BB6C63B-4C53-4552-991D-AB50B2E66247@netapp.com> From: Scott Brim Date: Tue, 4 Feb 2014 11:30:07 -0500 Message-ID: To: "Eggert, Lars" Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Cc: "rrg@irtf.org" Subject: Re: [rrg] Rebooting the RRG X-BeenThere: rrg@irtf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: IRTF Routing Research Group List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 04 Feb 2014 16:30:31 -0000 On Tue, Feb 4, 2014 at 6:02 AM, Eggert, Lars wrote: > Hi, > > so it looks like the effort to reboot the RRG has fizzled out, since we didn't manage to get critical mass for a meeting in London. That's not a good sign. > > I'm happy to have a conversation on the list or face-to-face in London about the future of the group; at the moment, my inclination is to close it in the near future, since we seem to have run out of steam. Getting together informally in London would be great, because by sitting down together, even if it's only a few of us, we may generate enough energy and focus to do something in IRTF. I believe RRG needs to be complementary with the IETF, and what that would mean to RRG isn't obvious right now. So I would be delighted if you could set up a face-to-face. Please don't kill the mailing list. It doesn't hurt anyone, and having it around will make it easier to have ad hoc discussions. You can declare the RRG suspended (it is :-)) but I don't see the point in expunging it. Thanks ... Scott From eosterweil@verisign.com Tue Feb 4 08:50:11 2014 Return-Path: X-Original-To: rrg@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: rrg@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 169F31A00F9 for ; Tue, 4 Feb 2014 08:50:11 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -4.201 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.201 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id E5Lh8NkDMy36 for ; Tue, 4 Feb 2014 08:50:09 -0800 (PST) Received: from exprod6og109.obsmtp.com (exprod6og109.obsmtp.com [64.18.1.23]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id CA7101A01D2 for ; Tue, 4 Feb 2014 08:50:03 -0800 (PST) Received: from osprey.verisign.com ([216.168.239.75]) (using TLSv1) by exprod6ob109.postini.com ([64.18.5.12]) with SMTP ID DSNKUvEaOyYbC2dhdF/ZsFXx1tE0B1FYMtU0@postini.com; Tue, 04 Feb 2014 08:50:05 PST Received: from brn1wnexcas02.vcorp.ad.vrsn.com (brn1wnexcas02.vcorp.ad.vrsn.com [10.173.152.206]) by osprey.verisign.com (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id s14Go2no001614 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=FAIL); Tue, 4 Feb 2014 11:50:02 -0500 Received: from BRN1WNEXMBX01.vcorp.ad.vrsn.com ([::1]) by brn1wnexcas02.vcorp.ad.vrsn.com ([::1]) with mapi id 14.02.0342.003; Tue, 4 Feb 2014 11:50:01 -0500 From: "Osterweil, Eric" To: Scott Brim Thread-Topic: [rrg] Rebooting the RRG Thread-Index: AQHO4UUNo0vElbAGd0SVhro/WnUq0Jql9KwAgAApVoCAAAW6gA== Date: Tue, 4 Feb 2014 16:50:01 +0000 Message-ID: <6E499501-18BB-49CE-ABC9-7820DE5F67B7@verisign.com> References: <5B131180-FA93-4A05-B3BE-3A23767EBD9D@netapp.com> <5BB6C63B-4C53-4552-991D-AB50B2E66247@netapp.com> In-Reply-To: Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: x-originating-ip: [10.173.152.4] Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-ID: <2D36C73A321EC64697D38108D179D1C6@verisign.com> Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable MIME-Version: 1.0 Cc: "rrg@irtf.org" Subject: Re: [rrg] Rebooting the RRG X-BeenThere: rrg@irtf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: IRTF Routing Research Group List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 04 Feb 2014 16:50:11 -0000 On Feb 4, 2014, at 11:30 AM, Scott Brim wrote: > On Tue, Feb 4, 2014 at 6:02 AM, Eggert, Lars wrote: >> Hi, >>=20 >> so it looks like the effort to reboot the RRG has fizzled out, since we = didn't manage to get critical mass for a meeting in London. That's not a go= od sign. >>=20 >> I'm happy to have a conversation on the list or face-to-face in London a= bout the future of the group; at the moment, my inclination is to close it = in the near future, since we seem to have run out of steam. >=20 > Getting together informally in London would be great, because by > sitting down together, even if it's only a few of us, we may generate > enough energy and focus to do something in IRTF. I believe RRG needs > to be complementary with the IETF, and what that would mean to RRG > isn't obvious right now. So I would be delighted if you could set up > a face-to-face. +1 > Please don't kill the mailing list. It doesn't hurt anyone, and having > it around will make it easier to have ad hoc discussions. You can > declare the RRG suspended (it is :-)) but I don't see the point in > expunging it. +1 Eric= From lars@netapp.com Tue Feb 4 08:52:34 2014 Return-Path: X-Original-To: rrg@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: rrg@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 538E31A00F9 for ; Tue, 4 Feb 2014 08:52:34 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -7.437 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-7.437 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.535, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id wJe_C9ipIXtW for ; Tue, 4 Feb 2014 08:52:33 -0800 (PST) Received: from mx12.netapp.com (mx12.netapp.com [216.240.18.77]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 77F7D1A0032 for ; Tue, 4 Feb 2014 08:52:33 -0800 (PST) X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.95,780,1384329600"; d="asc'?scan'208";a="140956802" Received: from vmwexceht01-prd.hq.netapp.com ([10.106.76.239]) by mx12-out.netapp.com with ESMTP; 04 Feb 2014 08:52:33 -0800 Received: from SACEXCMBX01-PRD.hq.netapp.com ([169.254.2.211]) by vmwexceht01-prd.hq.netapp.com ([10.106.76.239]) with mapi id 14.03.0123.003; Tue, 4 Feb 2014 08:52:33 -0800 From: "Eggert, Lars" To: Scott Brim Thread-Topic: [rrg] Rebooting the RRG Thread-Index: AQHO4UUNo0vElbAGd0SVhro/WnUq0Jql9KwAgABboICAAAZEAA== Date: Tue, 4 Feb 2014 16:52:31 +0000 Message-ID: <3533074F-01C6-41BC-851F-1B1B62833F23@netapp.com> References: <5B131180-FA93-4A05-B3BE-3A23767EBD9D@netapp.com> <5BB6C63B-4C53-4552-991D-AB50B2E66247@netapp.com> In-Reply-To: Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: yes X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: x-originating-ip: [10.106.53.51] Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="Apple-Mail=_37F44EA9-7697-4EE7-A909-E74455D6BC4C"; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; micalg=pgp-sha1 MIME-Version: 1.0 Cc: "rrg@irtf.org" Subject: Re: [rrg] Rebooting the RRG X-BeenThere: rrg@irtf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: IRTF Routing Research Group List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 04 Feb 2014 16:52:34 -0000 --Apple-Mail=_37F44EA9-7697-4EE7-A909-E74455D6BC4C Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Hi, On 2014-2-4, at 17:30, Scott Brim wrote: > Getting together informally in London would be great, because by > sitting down together, even if it's only a few of us, we may generate > enough energy and focus to do something in IRTF. I'd be happy to get anyone wanting to make this happen a room for a side = meeting; or just pick a pub and announce the time. Lars --Apple-Mail=_37F44EA9-7697-4EE7-A909-E74455D6BC4C Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="signature.asc" Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" Content-Description: Message signed with OpenPGP using GPGMail -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- iQCVAwUBUvEa0NZcnpRveo1xAQKmRAQAs4qM1fquWZAdPj2LC5TAkIVa9idRUm1u PwRXJXqb29NRWaYoK7adRoZsUlDM/T6jLS8Z4DD0+rlC+zUMLFSooZ8mVu0oO1Sz JFOOfpLJFv+Rx/qLEusVLbl3IPTFYiLjABnKMBpUrnHYAhBWoKDJYXnj7pMNkbEz iXMXbIumXT8= =+6sm -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --Apple-Mail=_37F44EA9-7697-4EE7-A909-E74455D6BC4C-- From matthias.wuebbeling@cs.uni-bonn.de Tue Feb 4 09:59:48 2014 Return-Path: X-Original-To: rrg@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: rrg@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D86DD1A012A for ; Tue, 4 Feb 2014 09:59:48 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -4.085 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.085 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, HELO_EQ_DE=0.35, MIME_8BIT_HEADER=0.3, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.535] autolearn=ham Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 8ouN2PYijpPl for ; Tue, 4 Feb 2014 09:59:45 -0800 (PST) Received: from postfix.iai.uni-bonn.de (postfix.iai.uni-bonn.de [131.220.8.4]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 398C21A0035 for ; Tue, 4 Feb 2014 09:59:44 -0800 (PST) X-IAI-Env-From: : [91.10.62.146] Received: from [192.168.2.103] (p5B0A3E92.dip0.t-ipconnect.de [91.10.62.146]) by postfix.iai.uni-bonn.de (Postfix) with ESMTP id 23E985C443 for ; Tue, 4 Feb 2014 18:59:33 +0100 (MET) (envelope-from matthias.wuebbeling@cs.uni-bonn.de) (envelope-to rrg@irtf.org) (1) (internal use: ta=1, tu=1, te=1, am=P, au=wuebbel) Message-ID: <52F12A84.1040609@cs.uni-bonn.de> Date: Tue, 04 Feb 2014 18:59:32 +0100 From: =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Matthias_W=FCbbeling?= User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:24.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/24.1.1 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: rrg@irtf.org References: <5B131180-FA93-4A05-B3BE-3A23767EBD9D@netapp.com> <5BB6C63B-4C53-4552-991D-AB50B2E66247@netapp.com> <3533074F-01C6-41BC-851F-1B1B62833F23@netapp.com> In-Reply-To: <3533074F-01C6-41BC-851F-1B1B62833F23@netapp.com> X-Enigmail-Version: 1.6 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: Re: [rrg] Rebooting the RRG X-BeenThere: rrg@irtf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: IRTF Routing Research Group List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 04 Feb 2014 17:59:49 -0000 -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 Hi list, i'm rather new to the rrg mailing list and the first thread i've to follow is "rebooting the rrg". I didn't know and hardly can believe, that there is currently no ongoing research regarding routing issues. But that's what the discussion looks like. As a phd student at University of Bonn (it-security group) i'm currently working in the field of BGP inter-AS routing anomalies and the evaluation and classification of these. I'm interested in the past and future work of the rrg and i'll try to attend the meeting in london, if i'm able to convince my boss of the necessity of it and get it paid :) Unfortunately i can't present results at the very next meeting because they are not yet made up. You, as rrg veterans should keep it alive and find young researchers to support it now and in the future. Thanks for your time. Kind regards, Matthias On 04.02.2014 17:52, Eggert, Lars wrote: > Hi, > > On 2014-2-4, at 17:30, Scott Brim wrote: >> Getting together informally in London would be great, because by >> sitting down together, even if it's only a few of us, we may >> generate enough energy and focus to do something in IRTF. > > I'd be happy to get anyone wanting to make this happen a room for a > side meeting; or just pick a pub and announce the time. > > Lars -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.22 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://www.enigmail.net/ iQEcBAEBAgAGBQJS8SqEAAoJENfZCsROOOe2JxcH/1zxx+Rw6ULxuSCzxQIo4Gkc SJWUaT6qqGYq0ljDohFwRRsshl24A41EFFTnq0pDKLlVWeXIE9CaRzn5Q9WkHlZE PPw2V/nnyMhdqxJsXp3HaYs2UzJeu5EMzVjrv5yUNSLO5DrIEY+M+beULcbRP9fT LN2DwvU2nTMnXfE/ugB1zeRpQF5dAmxNuoKShrSEfnH89oIeRRBKlLTVjZiV5c8W S8EbEPJUrEyb2BYAk0S1DT4hLASookcGBBcV1W0Boo1xvIRm0G6Ja3g4NqOm9Ibs sJbtj0nLf4Uy52YNOo0j3Yi9HK6dXOENXHw14hLlIff4RCAiwUMtd7p53YvJoxM= =EHY/ -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- From decoy@iki.fi Tue Feb 4 10:00:11 2014 Return-Path: X-Original-To: rrg@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: rrg@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 939021A0169 for ; Tue, 4 Feb 2014 10:00:11 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.301 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.301 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, J_CHICKENPOX_54=0.6, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=no Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id ftOvlSEpXUdS for ; Tue, 4 Feb 2014 10:00:10 -0800 (PST) Received: from mail.kapsi.fi (mx1.kapsi.fi [IPv6:2001:1bc8:1004::1:25]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 18F991A0158 for ; Tue, 4 Feb 2014 10:00:10 -0800 (PST) Received: from lakka.kapsi.fi ([2001:1bc8:1004::1] ident=Debian-exim) by mail.kapsi.fi with esmtps (TLS1.0:RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:32) (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from ) id 1WAkI3-0001Q2-QS; Tue, 04 Feb 2014 20:00:07 +0200 Received: from decoy (helo=localhost) by lakka.kapsi.fi with local-esmtp (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from ) id 1WAkHy-0004So-JO; Tue, 04 Feb 2014 20:00:02 +0200 Date: Tue, 4 Feb 2014 20:00:02 +0200 (EET) From: Sampo Syreeni Sender: decoy@kapsi.fi To: "Osterweil, Eric" In-Reply-To: <6E499501-18BB-49CE-ABC9-7820DE5F67B7@verisign.com> Message-ID: References: <5B131180-FA93-4A05-B3BE-3A23767EBD9D@netapp.com> <5BB6C63B-4C53-4552-991D-AB50B2E66247@netapp.com> <6E499501-18BB-49CE-ABC9-7820DE5F67B7@verisign.com> User-Agent: Alpine 2.00 (DEB 1167 2008-08-23) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed X-SA-Exim-Connect-IP: 2001:1bc8:1004::1 X-SA-Exim-Mail-From: decoy@iki.fi X-SA-Exim-Scanned: No (on mail.kapsi.fi); SAEximRunCond expanded to false Cc: "rrg@irtf.org" Subject: Re: [rrg] Rebooting the RRG X-BeenThere: rrg@irtf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: IRTF Routing Research Group List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 04 Feb 2014 18:00:11 -0000 On 2014-02-04, Osterweil, Eric wrote: >> Please don't kill the mailing list. It doesn't hurt anyone, and having >> it around will make it easier to have ad hoc discussions. You can >> declare the RRG suspended (it is :-)) but I don't see the point in >> expunging it. > > +1 -1. In the sense that stale lists really *can* hurt the normal IETF process. It's not for nothing that they are kept to a minimum. At the same time, even as the kind of lurker that I am, it'd be sad to see the list go, especially when there's so much research level routing stuff out there. Starting with my two favourites, which are content/name based routing as a fundamental primitive, and how to model+push the data from current overlays into the primary routing fabric. -- Sampo Syreeni, aka decoy - decoy@iki.fi, http://decoy.iki.fi/front +358-40-3255353, 025E D175 ABE5 027C 9494 EEB0 E090 8BA9 0509 85C2 From lars@netapp.com Tue Feb 4 10:35:44 2014 Return-Path: X-Original-To: rrg@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: rrg@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id F35281A01C5 for ; Tue, 4 Feb 2014 10:35:43 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.437 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.437 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.535, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id YDFhqWS_eSrT for ; Tue, 4 Feb 2014 10:35:35 -0800 (PST) Received: from mx11.netapp.com (mx11.netapp.com [216.240.18.76]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 749FC1A0125 for ; Tue, 4 Feb 2014 10:35:35 -0800 (PST) X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.95,781,1384329600"; d="asc'?scan'208";a="100011447" Received: from vmwexceht04-prd.hq.netapp.com ([10.106.77.34]) by mx11-out.netapp.com with ESMTP; 04 Feb 2014 10:35:35 -0800 Received: from SACEXCMBX01-PRD.hq.netapp.com ([169.254.2.211]) by vmwexceht04-prd.hq.netapp.com ([10.106.77.34]) with mapi id 14.03.0123.003; Tue, 4 Feb 2014 10:35:35 -0800 From: "Eggert, Lars" To: IRTF Routing RG Thread-Topic: [rrg] Rebooting the RRG Thread-Index: AQHO4UUNo0vElbAGd0SVhro/WnUq0Jql9KwAgABboICAAAWQgIAAE5AAgAAJ5AA= Date: Tue, 4 Feb 2014 18:35:34 +0000 Message-ID: <483D4203-45F2-49D0-BB3B-4E1BA4D6F170@netapp.com> References: <5B131180-FA93-4A05-B3BE-3A23767EBD9D@netapp.com> <5BB6C63B-4C53-4552-991D-AB50B2E66247@netapp.com> <6E499501-18BB-49CE-ABC9-7820DE5F67B7@verisign.com> In-Reply-To: Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: yes X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: x-originating-ip: [10.104.60.115] Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="Apple-Mail=_7BA3FD2C-72E9-4BB6-901C-6AB4E1602378"; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; micalg=pgp-sha1 MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: [rrg] Rebooting the RRG X-BeenThere: rrg@irtf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: IRTF Routing Research Group List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 04 Feb 2014 18:35:44 -0000 --Apple-Mail=_7BA3FD2C-72E9-4BB6-901C-6AB4E1602378 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Hi, nobody is debating that there's interesting routing research being done. = We even gave quite a number of ANRPs (Applied Networking Research = Prizes) to routing papers, and flew the main authors to IETF meetings to = present. What we don't seem to have is a core group of RRG participants with the = energy of reaching out to and bringing the research that is out there = into the group, on a continuous basis. Those of you who feel that the = group should stay around, please realize that you need to dedicate some = of your own time towards making that happen. Lars --Apple-Mail=_7BA3FD2C-72E9-4BB6-901C-6AB4E1602378 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="signature.asc" Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" Content-Description: Message signed with OpenPGP using GPGMail -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- iQCVAwUBUvEy7tZcnpRveo1xAQL3yQQAiXcYadO5x6H1IRgti8WHIaA6VZ1qk5yC EqGahh80NJqj/4+MdGfeKXwq2gj8CJNU4jwcptIib4LBcpeh4eSfRM6FifFcDvR+ NU9KQ1BiXsb+u2gMRhRYsX84XhrSOMWIY0wgCrOMzfwBA+LetNDEaPS933rXLJer yQXTU21Nx6E= =2bwB -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --Apple-Mail=_7BA3FD2C-72E9-4BB6-901C-6AB4E1602378-- From scott.brim@gmail.com Tue Feb 4 11:15:17 2014 Return-Path: X-Original-To: rrg@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: rrg@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B233A1A013B for ; Tue, 4 Feb 2014 11:15:17 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id pd3PvyOli3Td for ; Tue, 4 Feb 2014 11:15:14 -0800 (PST) Received: from mail-ob0-x233.google.com (mail-ob0-x233.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4003:c01::233]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 453A21A0127 for ; Tue, 4 Feb 2014 11:15:14 -0800 (PST) Received: by mail-ob0-f179.google.com with SMTP id wo20so9981862obc.38 for ; Tue, 04 Feb 2014 11:15:13 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; bh=ChzeobmrF+5x1CkJdVWOOoZ6OiPle3NtWXJYzM1s0UM=; b=tr63lfFWX5unyt7pv8t1N6GnneyLN4YZWeNTFQJVK6+eJHUShBbL5kldKt67Lak9Zk baYZVerQ2iW5mY2Qf5m6IFhwn4p7r/tMLjDBx9dmT7VFpvO3h5u56HdAIp5LLIQ7ifKy XPkFgfvmd/7DFz6yTSYzP9Ousci4X2vRhBsayYtiliYalTqbEbHK1I4TkghRLb995MSD CVCDuLzqjozP+5BncLoXz7VbvLrl/RpRnRJXPbYnysWwyzoUIBc9poSUl/NXDmu2bfWj orRld7HhADQjYXsAAMQdPiQ0xIHfHt2QvkAX8EJ5rRZ1bFeTaZoejDkVhmqTZeKuMu+Z sy9w== X-Received: by 10.60.165.72 with SMTP id yw8mr2998774oeb.71.1391541313693; Tue, 04 Feb 2014 11:15:13 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.182.48.9 with HTTP; Tue, 4 Feb 2014 11:14:53 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: <483D4203-45F2-49D0-BB3B-4E1BA4D6F170@netapp.com> References: <5B131180-FA93-4A05-B3BE-3A23767EBD9D@netapp.com> <5BB6C63B-4C53-4552-991D-AB50B2E66247@netapp.com> <6E499501-18BB-49CE-ABC9-7820DE5F67B7@verisign.com> <483D4203-45F2-49D0-BB3B-4E1BA4D6F170@netapp.com> From: Scott Brim Date: Tue, 4 Feb 2014 14:14:53 -0500 Message-ID: To: "Eggert, Lars" Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Cc: IRTF Routing RG Subject: Re: [rrg] Rebooting the RRG X-BeenThere: rrg@irtf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: IRTF Routing Research Group List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 04 Feb 2014 19:15:18 -0000 On Tue, Feb 4, 2014 at 1:35 PM, Eggert, Lars wrote: > What we don't seem to have is a core group of RRG participants with the e= nergy of reaching out to and bringing the research that is out there into t= he group, on a continuous basis. Those of you who feel that the group shoul= d stay around, please realize that you need to dedicate some of your own ti= me towards making that happen. I see it as a problem of utility. Researchers already have at least one well-respected way to convene. Why would any researcher want to push an idea through the RRG as it is now? The last time we rebooted, it was specifically for "architectural alternatives, including, but not limited to, separating host location and identification information". There was a unifying mission, a plan, an end goal, all related to IETF efforts. RGs are often successful through being complementary to what is going on in the IETF. I propose that we have an exploratory f2f meeting with the goal of coming up with one or two missions at that level, truly relevant to the IETF. We announce it widely in the routing area. Presentations and papers would not be required but they would be welcome. If none are offered, we meet anyway. OK? Scott From menth@uni-tuebingen.de Tue Feb 4 11:24:40 2014 Return-Path: X-Original-To: rrg@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: rrg@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 823271A01E5 for ; Tue, 4 Feb 2014 11:24:40 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -4.385 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.385 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, HELO_EQ_DE=0.35, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.535] autolearn=ham Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id pwj3Bb9NmJRa for ; Tue, 4 Feb 2014 11:24:37 -0800 (PST) Received: from mx09.uni-tuebingen.de (mx09.uni-tuebingen.de [134.2.3.2]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 24CF41A01D4 for ; Tue, 4 Feb 2014 11:24:36 -0800 (PST) Received: from [192.168.1.100] (HSI-KBW-085-216-087-055.hsi.kabelbw.de [85.216.87.55]) (authenticated bits=0) by mx09.uni-tuebingen.de (8.14.3/8.14.3) with ESMTP id s14JORbt020495 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-CAMELLIA256-SHA bits=256 verify=FAIL) for ; Tue, 4 Feb 2014 20:24:33 +0100 Message-ID: <52F13E6C.5070506@uni-tuebingen.de> Date: Tue, 04 Feb 2014 20:24:28 +0100 From: Michael Menth User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:24.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/24.2.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: rrg@irtf.org References: <5B131180-FA93-4A05-B3BE-3A23767EBD9D@netapp.com> <5BB6C63B-4C53-4552-991D-AB50B2E66247@netapp.com> In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-AntiVirus: checked by Avira MailGate (version: 3.2.1.26; AVE: 8.2.12.180; VDF: 7.11.129.110; host: mx09); id=4011-fkzBVv Subject: Re: [rrg] Rebooting the RRG X-BeenThere: rrg@irtf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: IRTF Routing Research Group List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 04 Feb 2014 19:24:40 -0000 Hi, Am 04.02.2014 17:30, schrieb Scott Brim: > On Tue, Feb 4, 2014 at 6:02 AM, Eggert, Lars wrote: >> Hi, >> >> so it looks like the effort to reboot the RRG has fizzled out, since we didn't manage to get critical mass for a meeting in London. That's not a good sign. >> >> I'm happy to have a conversation on the list or face-to-face in London about the future of the group; at the moment, my inclination is to close it in the near future, since we seem to have run out of steam. > Getting together informally in London would be great, because by > sitting down together, even if it's only a few of us, we may generate > enough energy and focus to do something in IRTF. I believe RRG needs > to be complementary with the IETF, and what that would mean to RRG > isn't obvious right now. So I would be delighted if you could set up > a face-to-face. +1 I plan to participate. Best wishes, Michael > > Please don't kill the mailing list. It doesn't hurt anyone, and having > it around will make it easier to have ad hoc discussions. You can > declare the RRG suspended (it is :-)) but I don't see the point in > expunging it. > > Thanks ... Scott > _______________________________________________ > rrg mailing list > rrg@irtf.org > http://www.irtf.org/mailman/listinfo/rrg -- Prof. Dr. habil. Michael Menth University of Tuebingen Faculty of Science Department of Computer Science Chair of Communication Networks Sand 13, 72076 Tuebingen, Germany phone: (+49)-7071/29-70505 fax: (+49)-7071/29-5220 mailto:menth@uni-tuebingen.de http://kn.inf.uni-tuebingen.de From heinerhummel@aol.com Tue Feb 4 16:38:41 2014 Return-Path: X-Original-To: rrg@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: rrg@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id BD3261A016A for ; Tue, 4 Feb 2014 16:38:41 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: 0.266 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.266 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_50=0.8, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.535, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id gx1TRfql08iN for ; Tue, 4 Feb 2014 16:38:39 -0800 (PST) Received: from omr-d08.mx.aol.com (omr-d08.mx.aol.com [205.188.109.207]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2FE821A0169 for ; Tue, 4 Feb 2014 16:38:39 -0800 (PST) Received: from mtaomg-mcb02.mx.aol.com (mtaomg-mcb02.mx.aol.com [172.26.50.176]) by omr-d08.mx.aol.com (Outbound Mail Relay) with ESMTP id 9FDD5700444E8 for ; Tue, 4 Feb 2014 19:38:38 -0500 (EST) Received: from core-dqc003c.r1000.mail.aol.com (core-dqc003.r1000.mail.aol.com [172.29.161.137]) by mtaomg-mcb02.mx.aol.com (OMAG/Core Interface) with ESMTP id 72FFB38000086 for ; Tue, 4 Feb 2014 19:38:38 -0500 (EST) References: <5B131180-FA93-4A05-B3BE-3A23767EBD9D@netapp.com> <5BB6C63B-4C53-4552-991D-AB50B2E66247@netapp.com> <6E499501-18BB-49CE-ABC9-7820DE5F67B7@verisign.com> <483D4203-45F2-49D0-BB3B-4E1BA4D6F170@netapp.com> To: rrg@irtf.org In-Reply-To: <483D4203-45F2-49D0-BB3B-4E1BA4D6F170@netapp.com> X-MB-Message-Source: WebUI MIME-Version: 1.0 From: heinerhummel@aol.com X-MB-Message-Type: User Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="--------MB_8D0F021BEA49324_B50_16B38_webmail-m280.sysops.aol.com" X-Mailer: AOL Webmail 38331-STANDARD Received: from 178.26.195.50 by webmail-m280.sysops.aol.com (64.12.145.234) with HTTP (WebMailUI); Tue, 04 Feb 2014 19:38:38 -0500 Message-Id: <8D0F021BE964AE4-B50-5B9C@webmail-m280.sysops.aol.com> X-Originating-IP: [178.26.195.50] Date: Tue, 4 Feb 2014 19:38:38 -0500 (EST) x-aol-global-disposition: G DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=mx.aol.com; s=20121107; t=1391560718; bh=84Xwhac+VFWTsHWRPyB7EkrGCZuiEU9OBkeKfLZ+b0Y=; h=From:To:Subject:Message-Id:Date:MIME-Version:Content-Type; b=clF3+CXniIpQPJphLnNDIGSGJ6ZR5270HMKkRwb8ZNy8nAu+QlB4WP4Udc/udh3Fz pkD8cQ/v5lY3qfztjt+yQnmIMyq96n4CwLMi/QFwGDZ14SjC64BeDxQwXsq7dY5Y3n 3I6dVPKxEbg5e+jjo7z5hmV1fgOQHK7yAAnKh93E= x-aol-sid: 3039ac1a32b052f1880e7c42 Subject: Re: [rrg] Rebooting the RRG X-BeenThere: rrg@irtf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: IRTF Routing Research Group List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 05 Feb 2014 00:38:41 -0000 This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ----------MB_8D0F021BEA49324_B50_16B38_webmail-m280.sysops.aol.com Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Lixia excepted, I tried in vain to stimulate a discussion about the IETF's = routing paradigms which I have questioned many times: - the diffserv philosophy (the total absence of the WHERE-awareness) - the intra-versus inter-domain distinction (Dijkstra versus distance vecto= r) and also about - the absence of a MULTICAST FIB. - the absence of a ANYCAST FIB - the absence of (scoped) Broadcast - the negligence of IPv4 This week the German government has been suit by the CCC because it missed/= is missing to protect people against spy attacks by the US's NSA. With the current routing architecture and its complete absence of any WHERE= -awareness there is no way to give back any country its sovereignty.=20 With TARA that wouldn't be a problem: Each country would recognize "its" pa= rt of the internet (intra- and inter-domain portions alike) and could take = action that within its borders packets were encrypted according to its own = keys. Packets which are being sent to outside of the country would be recog= nized as such ones and the user might be questioned to confirm whether forw= arding should be done or not - just like he is reminded to add a subject l= ine if missing. Whenever an airplane crosses illegally some country, it is conceived as a v= iolation of the respective nation's sovereignty. But spying out a l l c= ommunication data is by far worse. That crashes any nation's sovereignty. Attempts to accomplish mutual no-spy= treaties show the helplessness of the German government. The right way wou= ld be - and here is the IETF asked to come up with results - to provide = solutions which PREVENT spy attacks as we are experiencing today in the fir= st place! =20 I know that NSA folks are as well subscribed to this list (but eventually t= hey may have positive feeling towards Edward S. too). I think such a security service is the most important one of all that can b= e based on the WHERE-awareness, much more important than to be able to redi= rect parts of the traffic such that they bypass some congested area to the = left or to the right. But so far no one has even tried to explain the advantages of the current a= rchitecture. Heiner -----Urspr=C3=BCngliche Mitteilung-----=20 Von: Eggert, Lars An: IRTF Routing RG Verschickt: Di, 4 Feb 2014 7:35 pm Betreff: Re: [rrg] Rebooting the RRG Hi, nobody is debating that there's interesting routing research being done. We= even=20 gave quite a number of ANRPs (Applied Networking Research Prizes) to routin= g=20 papers, and flew the main authors to IETF meetings to present. What we don't seem to have is a core group of RRG participants with the ene= rgy=20 of reaching out to and bringing the research that is out there into the gro= up,=20 on a continuous basis. Those of you who feel that the group should stay aro= und,=20 please realize that you need to dedicate some of your own time towards maki= ng=20 that happen. Lars =20 _______________________________________________ rrg mailing list rrg@irtf.org http://www.irtf.org/mailman/listinfo/rrg =20 ----------MB_8D0F021BEA49324_B50_16B38_webmail-m280.sysops.aol.com Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/html; charset="utf-8" Lixia excepted, I tried in vain to stimulate a discussion about the IETF= 's routing paradigms which I have questioned many times:

- the diffserv philosophy (the to= tal absence of the WHERE-awareness)
- the intra-versus inter-domain distin= ction (Dijkstra versus distance vector)

and also about
- the absence of a MULTICAST FIB.
- the absence of a ANYCAST FIB<= /div>
- the absence of (scoped) Broadcast
- the negligence of IPv4

This week the German government has be= en suit by the CCC because it missed/is missing to protect people against s= py attacks by the US's  NSA.

With the current routing architecture = and its complete absence of any WHERE-awareness there is no way to give bac= k any country its sovereignty. 
With TARA that wouldn't be a problem: = Each country would recognize "its" part of the internet (intra- and inter-d= omain portions alike) and could take action that within its borders packets= were encrypted according to its own keys. Packets which are being sent to = outside of the country would be recognized as such ones and the user might = be questioned to confirm whether forwarding should be done or not - just li= ke he is reminded  to add a subject line if missing.

Whenever an airplane crosses illegally= some country, it is conceived as a violation of the respective nation's so= vereignty. But spying  out  a l l   communication data is by= far worse.
That crashes any nation's sovereignty. Attempts to&nb= sp;accomplish mutual no-spy treaties show the helplessness of the Germ= an government. The right way would be  - and here is the  IETF as= ked to come up with results - to provide  solutions which PREVENT spy = attacks as we are experiencing today in the first place!  

I know that NSA folks are as well subscribed to this = list (but eventually they may have positive feeling towards Edward S. too).=

I think such a security service is the most important= one of all that can be based on the WHERE-awareness, much more important t= han to be able to redirect parts of the traffic such that they bypass some = congested area to the left or to the right.

But so far no one has even tried to explain the advan= tages of the current architecture.

Heiner





 




Hi,

nobody is debating that there's interesting routing research being done. We=
 even=20
gave quite a number of ANRPs (Applied Networking Research Prizes) to routin=
g=20
papers, and flew the main authors to IETF meetings to present.

What we don't seem to have is a core group of RRG participants with the ene=
rgy=20
of reaching out to and bringing the research that is out there into the gro=
up,=20
on a continuous basis. Those of you who feel that the group should stay aro=
und,=20
please realize that you need to dedicate some of your own time towards maki=
ng=20
that happen.

Lars

________________________________________=
_______
rrg mailing list
rrg@irtf.org
http://www.irtf.org/mailman/listinfo/rrg
----------MB_8D0F021BEA49324_B50_16B38_webmail-m280.sysops.aol.com-- From heinerhummel@aol.com Wed Feb 5 00:08:00 2014 Return-Path: X-Original-To: rrg@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: rrg@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7EB381A00AD for ; Wed, 5 Feb 2014 00:08:00 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -0.535 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.535 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_20=-0.001, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.535, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id CC7gAJ9RGmHe for ; Wed, 5 Feb 2014 00:07:59 -0800 (PST) Received: from omr-d07.mx.aol.com (omr-d07.mx.aol.com [205.188.109.204]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C58E81A009E for ; Wed, 5 Feb 2014 00:07:58 -0800 (PST) Received: from mtaomg-mae01.mx.aol.com (mtaomg-mae01.mx.aol.com [172.26.254.143]) by omr-d07.mx.aol.com (Outbound Mail Relay) with ESMTP id 21D59700000B3; Wed, 5 Feb 2014 03:07:58 -0500 (EST) Received: from core-dqc003c.r1000.mail.aol.com (core-dqc003.r1000.mail.aol.com [172.29.161.137]) by mtaomg-mae01.mx.aol.com (OMAG/Core Interface) with ESMTP id C6C3838000081; Wed, 5 Feb 2014 03:07:57 -0500 (EST) To: surfer@mauigateway.com, rrg@irtf.org X-MB-Message-Source: WebUI X-MB-Message-Type: User MIME-Version: 1.0 From: heinerhummel@aol.com Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="--------MB_8D0F0608343AC0E_B50_1D4A6_webmail-m280.sysops.aol.com" X-Mailer: AOL Webmail 38331-STANDARD Received: from 178.26.195.50 by webmail-m280.sysops.aol.com (64.12.145.234) with HTTP (WebMailUI); Wed, 05 Feb 2014 03:07:56 -0500 Message-Id: <8D0F06082D16A0E-B50-77E0@webmail-m280.sysops.aol.com> X-Originating-IP: [178.26.195.50] Date: Wed, 5 Feb 2014 03:07:57 -0500 (EST) x-aol-global-disposition: G DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=mx.aol.com; s=20121107; t=1391587677; bh=5PKA90TkfXRdTKs3AbYj/iTVyN4VVVpKbjCq+nO1TTA=; h=From:To:Subject:Message-Id:Date:MIME-Version:Content-Type; b=n1rBmElE7dpoOItAFJV2YNWEemS+ieVSHe6EBSgSzz+yG2k+NGtGwWZB877n1LmMC +hvn5By6esg0yN7+PwTVpzx42AlFapNKGetEKw5aO52b4tVEv/GdhHZeFzg9pFhliW 0NpImFdvqK2vFWPZu3ylVVxa6vivstK9i3aaSbvA= x-aol-sid: 3039ac1afe8f52f1f15d6d84 Subject: Re: [rrg] Rebooting the RRG X-BeenThere: rrg@irtf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: IRTF Routing Research Group List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 05 Feb 2014 08:08:00 -0000 This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ----------MB_8D0F0608343AC0E_B50_1D4A6_webmail-m280.sysops.aol.com Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" The user should be made aware that his equipment is about to send out data. I have no problems if this were done in either case (national or internatio= nal destination). Look, a government is suit for not protecting its people for being spied ou= t. This means there is a strong interest for such protection but this also means, a state has to be empowered to effectively prevent wha= t it is accused for. This is not balkanization. People have created states/nations themselves fo= r good reason. The existing permanent data fraud must not last forever. Or do you think this is a special form of "freedom/liberty" ? Heiner -----Urspr=C3=BCngliche Mitteilung-----=20 Von: Scott Weeks An: heinerhummel Verschickt: Mi, 5 Feb 2014 2:52 am Betreff: Re: [rrg] Rebooting the RRG Wouldn't this lead to balkinization of the internet? scott --- heinerhummel@aol.com wrote: From: heinerhummel@aol.com With the current routing architecture and its complete absence of any=20 WHERE-awareness there is no way to give back any country its sovereignty.= =20 With TARA that wouldn't be a problem: Each country would recognize "its"=20 part of the internet (intra- and inter-domain portions alike) and could=20 take action that within its borders packets were encrypted according to=20 its own keys. Packets which are being sent to outside of the country would= =20 be recognized as such ones and the user might be questioned to confirm=20 whether forwarding should be done or not - just like he is reminded to=20 add a subject line if missing. =20 ----------MB_8D0F0608343AC0E_B50_1D4A6_webmail-m280.sysops.aol.com Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/html; charset="utf-8"
The user should be made aware that his equipment is = about to send out data.
I have no= problems if this were done in either case (national or international desti= nation).

Look, a government is suit for n= ot protecting its people for being spied out. This means there is a st= rong interest for such protection
but this also means, a state has= to be empowered to effectively prevent what it is accused for.

This is not balkanization. = People have created states/nations themselves for good reason. The existing= permanent data fraud must not last forever.
Or do you think this is a specia= l form of "freedom/liberty" ?

Heiner



Wouldn't this lead to balkinization of the internet?

scott


--- heinerhummel@aol.com wrote:
From: heinerhummel@aol.com

With the current routing architecture and its complete absence of any=20
WHERE-awareness there is no way to give back any country its sovereignty.=
=20
With TARA that wouldn't be a problem: Each country would recognize "its"=20
part of the internet (intra- and inter-domain portions alike) and could=20
take action that within its borders packets were encrypted according to=20
its own keys. Packets which are being sent to outside of the country would=
=20
be recognized as such ones and the user might be questioned to confirm=20
whether forwarding should be done or not - just like he is reminded  to=20
add a subject line if missing.
----------MB_8D0F0608343AC0E_B50_1D4A6_webmail-m280.sysops.aol.com-- From heinerhummel@aol.com Tue Feb 11 13:58:22 2014 Return-Path: X-Original-To: rrg@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: rrg@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id BBB341A0770 for ; Tue, 11 Feb 2014 13:58:22 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: 0.253 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.253 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_50=0.8, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.548, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id fwzbbVoB4NP3 for ; Tue, 11 Feb 2014 13:58:19 -0800 (PST) Received: from omr-d05.mx.aol.com (omr-d05.mx.aol.com [205.188.109.202]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B25811A0783 for ; Tue, 11 Feb 2014 13:58:13 -0800 (PST) Received: from mtaomg-mab02.mx.aol.com (mtaomg-mab02.mx.aol.com [172.26.249.84]) by omr-d05.mx.aol.com (Outbound Mail Relay) with ESMTP id E487670007CCD for ; Tue, 11 Feb 2014 16:58:12 -0500 (EST) Received: from core-dqa002a.r1000.mail.aol.com (core-dqa002.r1000.mail.aol.com [172.29.211.197]) by mtaomg-mab02.mx.aol.com (OMAG/Core Interface) with ESMTP id A71F438000083 for ; Tue, 11 Feb 2014 16:58:12 -0500 (EST) References: <5B131180-FA93-4A05-B3BE-3A23767EBD9D@netapp.com> <5BB6C63B-4C53-4552-991D-AB50B2E66247@netapp.com> <6E499501-18BB-49CE-ABC9-7820DE5F67B7@verisign.com> <483D4203-45F2-49D0-BB3B-4E1BA4D6F170@netapp.com> <8D0F021BE964AE4-B50-5B9C@webmail-m280.sysops.aol.com> To: rrg@irtf.org In-Reply-To: <8D0F021BE964AE4-B50-5B9C@webmail-m280.sysops.aol.com> X-MB-Message-Source: WebUI MIME-Version: 1.0 From: heinerhummel@aol.com X-MB-Message-Type: User Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="--------MB_8D0F58B7E3C863C_918_7FF59_webmail-vd016.sysops.aol.com" X-Mailer: AOL Webmail 38366-STANDARD Received: from 178.26.195.50 by webmail-vd016.sysops.aol.com (205.188.178.107) with HTTP (WebMailUI); Tue, 11 Feb 2014 16:58:12 -0500 Message-Id: <8D0F58B7E18D17E-918-2105B@webmail-vd016.sysops.aol.com> X-Originating-IP: [178.26.195.50] Date: Tue, 11 Feb 2014 16:58:12 -0500 (EST) x-aol-global-disposition: G DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=mx.aol.com; s=20121107; t=1392155892; bh=pqCRR5HaTe/3vBBTGIXdGddtxEp072OQeNdfNTD5bVU=; h=From:To:Subject:Message-Id:Date:MIME-Version:Content-Type; b=KvX3e+5dlLh9skf7Zu04TzDu1KsahKMGE94fdMtVM+ReHhcLXL5997TnuVnA96mOu 9WChBCsLnEdGqQ8l6dYolu61aa7XCsjBEVxbLVDYyI1N6PhhskiWxoqPyJPVYm+On8 KNkyW2qHnfNBvG0RVjksBSxwR+PeHv9btxM0Yi+Q= x-aol-sid: 3039ac1af95452fa9cf401f7 Subject: Re: [rrg] Rebooting the RRG X-BeenThere: rrg@irtf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: IRTF Routing Research Group List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 11 Feb 2014 21:58:23 -0000 This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ----------MB_8D0F58B7E3C863C_918_7FF59_webmail-vd016.sysops.aol.com Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" By my last email (see below) I also addressed the need to do something agai= nst a total spay of the internet traffic by the NSA. But there is neither interest nor doubts wrt my email, just complete silenc= e. Today people are demonstrating against what the NSA is doing persistently. = see http://www.sueddeutsche.de/digital/aktionstag-the-day-we-fight-back-alle-ge= gen-goliath-1.1884738 But what can I deduct from the silence on this list? Does it mean that all on this list ok what the NSA is doing?=20 Heiner,=20 pretty disappointed=20 with -----Urspr=C3=BCngliche Mitteilung-----=20 Von: heinerhummel An: rrg Verschickt: Mi, 5 Feb 2014 1:38 am Betreff: Re: [rrg] Rebooting the RRG Lixia excepted, I tried in vain to stimulate a discussion about the IETF's = routing paradigms which I have questioned many times: - the diffserv philosophy (the total absence of the WHERE-awareness) - the intra-versus inter-domain distinction (Dijkstra versus distance vecto= r) and also about - the absence of a MULTICAST FIB. - the absence of a ANYCAST FIB - the absence of (scoped) Broadcast - the negligence of IPv4 This week the German government has been suit by the CCC because it missed/= is missing to protect people against spy attacks by the US's NSA. With the current routing architecture and its complete absence of any WHERE= -awareness there is no way to give back any country its sovereignty.=20 With TARA that wouldn't be a problem: Each country would recognize "its" pa= rt of the internet (intra- and inter-domain portions alike) and could take = action that within its borders packets were encrypted according to its own = keys. Packets which are being sent to outside of the country would be recog= nized as such ones and the user might be questioned to confirm whether forw= arding should be done or not - just like he is reminded to add a subject l= ine if missing. Whenever an airplane crosses illegally some country, it is conceived as a v= iolation of the respective nation's sovereignty. But spying out a l l c= ommunication data is by far worse. That crashes any nation's sovereignty. Attempts to accomplish mutual no-spy= treaties show the helplessness of the German government. The right way wou= ld be - and here is the IETF asked to come up with results - to provide = solutions which PREVENT spy attacks as we are experiencing today in the fir= st place! =20 I know that NSA folks are as well subscribed to this list (but eventually t= hey may have positive feeling towards Edward S. too). I think such a security service is the most important one of all that can b= e based on the WHERE-awareness, much more important than to be able to redi= rect parts of the traffic such that they bypass some congested area to the = left or to the right. But so far no one has even tried to explain the advantages of the current a= rchitecture. Heiner -----Urspr=C3=BCngliche Mitteilung-----=20 Von: Eggert, Lars An: IRTF Routing RG Verschickt: Di, 4 Feb 2014 7:35 pm Betreff: Re: [rrg] Rebooting the RRG Hi, nobody is debating that there's interesting routing research being done. We= even=20 gave quite a number of ANRPs (Applied Networking Research Prizes) to routin= g=20 papers, and flew the main authors to IETF meetings to present. What we don't seem to have is a core group of RRG participants with the ene= rgy=20 of reaching out to and bringing the research that is out there into the gro= up,=20 on a continuous basis. Those of you who feel that the group should stay aro= und,=20 please realize that you need to dedicate some of your own time towards maki= ng=20 that happen. Lars =20 _______________________________________________ rrg mailing list rrg@irtf.org http://www.irtf.org/mailman/listinfo/rrg =20 ----------MB_8D0F58B7E3C863C_918_7FF59_webmail-vd016.sysops.aol.com Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/html; charset="utf-8"
By my last email (see below) I also addre= ssed the need to do something against a total spay of the internet traffic = by the NSA.
But there is neither interest nor doubts wrt my email= , just complete silence.

Today people are demonstrating against what the NSA i= s doing persistently. see
http://www.sueddeutsche.de/digital/a= ktionstag-the-day-we-fight-back-alle-gegen-goliath-1.1884738

But what can I deduct from the silence on this list?<= /font>

Does it mean that all on this list o= k what the NSA is doing? 

Heiner, 
pretty disappointed 




with



-----= Urspr=C3=BCngliche Mitteilung-----
Von: heinerhummel <heinerhummel@aol.com>
An: rrg <rrg@irtf.org>
Verschickt: Mi, 5 Feb 2014 1:38 am
Betreff: Re: [rrg] Rebooting the RRG

Lixia excepted, I tried in vain to stimulate a discussion about the IETF= 's routing paradigms which I have questioned many times:

- the diffserv philosophy (the to= tal absence of the WHERE-awareness)
- the intra-versus inter-domain distin= ction (Dijkstra versus distance vector)

and also about
- the absence of a MULTICAST FIB.
- the absence of a ANYCAST FIB<= /div>
- the absence of (scoped) Broadcast
- the negligence of IPv4

This week the German government has be= en suit by the CCC because it missed/is missing to protect people against s= py attacks by the US's  NSA.

With the current routing architecture = and its complete absence of any WHERE-awareness there is no way to give bac= k any country its sovereignty. 
With TARA that wouldn't be a problem: = Each country would recognize "its" part of the internet (intra- and inter-d= omain portions alike) and could take action that within its borders packets= were encrypted according to its own keys. Packets which are being sent to = outside of the country would be recognized as such ones and the user might = be questioned to confirm whether forwarding should be done or not - just li= ke he is reminded  to add a subject line if missing.

Whenever an airplane crosses illegally= some country, it is conceived as a violation of the respective nation's so= vereignty. But spying  out  a l l   communication data is by= far worse.
That crashes any nation's sovereignty. Attempts to&nb= sp;accomplish mutual no-spy treaties show the helplessness of the Germ= an government. The right way would be  - and here is the  IETF as= ked to come up with results - to provide  solutions which PREVENT spy = attacks as we are experiencing today in the first place!  

I know that NSA folks are as well subscribed to this = list (but eventually they may have positive feeling towards Edward S. too).=

I think such a security service is the most important= one of all that can be based on the WHERE-awareness, much more important t= han to be able to redirect parts of the traffic such that they bypass some = congested area to the left or to the right.

But so far no one has even tried to explain the advan= tages of the current architecture.

Heiner




lars@netapp.com>
An: IRTF Routing RG <rrg@irtf.org>= ;
Verschickt: Di, 4 Feb 2014 7:35 pm
Betreff: Re: [rrg] Rebooting the RRG

Hi,

nobody is debating that there's interesting routing research being done. We=
 even=20
gave quite a number of ANRPs (Applied Networking Research Prizes) to routin=
g=20
papers, and flew the main authors to IETF meetings to present.

What we don't seem to have is a core group of RRG participants with the ene=
rgy=20
of reaching out to and bringing the research that is out there into the gro=
up,=20
on a continuous basis. Those of you who feel that the group should stay aro=
und,=20
please realize that you need to dedicate some of your own time towards maki=
ng=20
that happen.

Lars
=20 
________________________________________=
_______
rrg mailing list
rrg@irtf.org
http://www.irtf.org/mailman/listinfo/rrg
=20
----------MB_8D0F58B7E3C863C_918_7FF59_webmail-vd016.sysops.aol.com-- From huitema@huitema.net Tue Feb 11 23:43:23 2014 Return-Path: X-Original-To: rrg@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: rrg@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6CCA31A0874 for ; Tue, 11 Feb 2014 23:43:23 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: 1.4 X-Spam-Level: * X-Spam-Status: No, score=1.4 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_50=0.8, J_CHICKENPOX_31=0.6, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001] autolearn=no Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id QYzQLTEMs195 for ; Tue, 11 Feb 2014 23:43:21 -0800 (PST) Received: from xsmtp01.mail2web.com (xsmtp01.mail2web.com [168.144.250.230]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8DFA51A0876 for ; Tue, 11 Feb 2014 23:43:21 -0800 (PST) Received: from [10.5.2.11] (helo=xmail01.myhosting.com) by xsmtp01.mail2web.com with esmtps (TLS-1.0:DHE_RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:32) (Exim 4.63) (envelope-from ) id 1WDUTX-0006Q3-KV for rrg@irtf.org; Wed, 12 Feb 2014 02:43:20 -0500 Received: (qmail 23795 invoked from network); 12 Feb 2014 07:43:18 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO HUITEMA5) (Authenticated-user:_huitema@huitema.net@[24.16.156.113]) (envelope-sender ) by xmail01.myhosting.com (qmail-ldap-1.03) with ESMTPA for ; 12 Feb 2014 07:43:18 -0000 From: "Christian Huitema" To: , References: <5B131180-FA93-4A05-B3BE-3A23767EBD9D@netapp.com> <5BB6C63B-4C53-4552-991D-AB50B2E66247@netapp.com> <6E499501-18BB-49CE-ABC9-7820DE5F67B7@verisign.com> <483D4203-45F2-49D0-BB3B-4E1BA4D6F170@netapp.com> <8D0F021BE964AE4-B50-5B9C@webmail-m280.sysops.aol.com> <8D0F58B7E18D17E-918-2105B@webmail-vd016.sysops.aol.com> In-Reply-To: <8D0F58B7E18D17E-918-2105B@webmail-vd016.sysops.aol.com> Date: Tue, 11 Feb 2014 23:43:17 -0800 Message-ID: <001a01cf27c6$18aef200$4a0cd600$@huitema.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook 15.0 Thread-Index: AQELl+77CCQ/eGDEQs2Cw/CMPYu1MwKMDMhzAnROsi0BR/whwwFO3mujAnbIGp4DEAD8EwJFR/OLm71A1oA= Content-Language: en-us Subject: Re: [rrg] Rebooting the RRG X-BeenThere: rrg@irtf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: IRTF Routing Research Group List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 12 Feb 2014 07:43:23 -0000 -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 > Today people are demonstrating against what the NSA is doing = persistently. see > = http://www.sueddeutsche.de/digital/aktionstag-the-day-we-fight-back-alle-= gegen-goliath-1.1884738 > > But what can I deduct from the silence on this list? The IETF work on pervasive monitoring and its prevention is discussed in = the "perpass" mailing list: = https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/perpass. Please feel free to join, = participate, write drafts... - -- Christian Huitema -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.20 (MingW32) Comment: Using gpg4o v3.2.34.4474 - http://www.gpg4o.de/ Charset: utf-8 iQEcBAEBAgAGBQJS+yYUAAoJELba05IUOHVQREQIAKNqxc8Gr7qSbBbE8Q6waWi7 8Wj2LQjjsvgoWKSFk4vQTse4UB/3tuSXPPQF9dIj8xcf655vMBDvwd6hfofUtyFw /sZnGFXZGX7xPGUE+z3uK/b1SqYMci39dHxajK5MwpwO++wMdrvvdMzZsHIHOwtn Oav4ouS27wby/MdmvyduXeAAhKOLWllLcukcZuLsZRYemBXKnLcwNsF9Aguzl064 EkMS2hD38iC/ZjhHtKa96esyUso+tcF7yvKQYT84Njxs2mPF6hkTXt2OulXTljeq 1ykPYWTfArzlRfBZO9OHvRRgtXkPqw/xbacktn7DGEHvB50tjFm9Isdcpo+PclA=3D =3DRM3i -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- From heinerhummel@aol.com Wed Feb 12 00:42:04 2014 Return-Path: X-Original-To: rrg@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: rrg@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9FA7E1A08C6 for ; Wed, 12 Feb 2014 00:42:04 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.247 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.247 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, J_CHICKENPOX_21=0.6, J_CHICKENPOX_31=0.6, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.548, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=no Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id upb7yHGy90k4 for ; Wed, 12 Feb 2014 00:42:02 -0800 (PST) Received: from omr-m01.mx.aol.com (omr-m01.mx.aol.com [64.12.143.75]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 674271A08BC for ; Wed, 12 Feb 2014 00:42:02 -0800 (PST) Received: from mtaomg-mcd02.mx.aol.com (mtaomg-mcd02.mx.aol.com [172.26.223.208]) by omr-m01.mx.aol.com (Outbound Mail Relay) with ESMTP id 8A309701E74CE; Wed, 12 Feb 2014 03:42:01 -0500 (EST) Received: from core-dqa002a.r1000.mail.aol.com (core-dqa002.r1000.mail.aol.com [172.29.211.197]) by mtaomg-mcd02.mx.aol.com (OMAG/Core Interface) with ESMTP id 4B95D38000081; Wed, 12 Feb 2014 03:42:01 -0500 (EST) References: <5B131180-FA93-4A05-B3BE-3A23767EBD9D@netapp.com> <5BB6C63B-4C53-4552-991D-AB50B2E66247@netapp.com> <6E499501-18BB-49CE-ABC9-7820DE5F67B7@verisign.com> <483D4203-45F2-49D0-BB3B-4E1BA4D6F170@netapp.com> <8D0F021BE964AE4-B50-5B9C@webmail-m280.sysops.aol.com> <8D0F58B7E18D17E-918-2105B@webmail-vd016.sysops.aol.com> <001a01cf27c6$18aef200$4a0cd600$@huitema.net> To: huitema@huitema.net, rrg@irtf.org In-Reply-To: <001a01cf27c6$18aef200$4a0cd600$@huitema.net> X-MB-Message-Source: WebUI MIME-Version: 1.0 From: heinerhummel@aol.com X-MB-Message-Type: User Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="--------MB_8D0F5E56E74665A_1B18_6277D_webmail-d166.sysops.aol.com" X-Mailer: Webmail 38366-STANDARD Received: from 178.26.195.50 by webmail-d166.sysops.aol.com (205.188.252.78) with HTTP (WebMailUI); Wed, 12 Feb 2014 03:42:00 -0500 Message-Id: <8D0F5E56E6AE0F2-1B18-1A380@webmail-d166.sysops.aol.com> X-Originating-IP: [178.26.195.50] Date: Wed, 12 Feb 2014 03:42:01 -0500 (EST) x-aol-global-disposition: G DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=mx.aol.com; s=20121107; t=1392194521; bh=CHAQM0OHbJlLHu08po/FKMS9Dw5iLMvjWnaByMy7Trs=; h=From:To:Subject:Message-Id:Date:MIME-Version:Content-Type; b=tuHkP99L48/CZvHjMeqCA7hKEsqqE3TjjhDnYJQ8Ss31JfbrHg/Ynn1KB615PoLY7 WWvUlkbZOfZKaZWyO/hKRPhgtXddsGNtFAGGbWvtUPXVPKO8i4VzxoQFcTtXVRq/PA SETihEw2suCSMfnTVWnk8HFa/ND6w6bqRDUWFfrc= x-aol-sid: 3039ac1adfd052fb33d95427 Subject: Re: [rrg] Rebooting the RRG X-BeenThere: rrg@irtf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: IRTF Routing Research Group List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 12 Feb 2014 08:42:04 -0000 This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ----------MB_8D0F5E56E74665A_1B18_6277D_webmail-d166.sysops.aol.com Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Thank you Christian, I have just subscribed successfully. I do have some proposal to contribute which is not of RRG relevance. "WHERE-awareness or not" however would be RRG relevant. But obviously, the = alternative (which I like to call the DiffServ-mantra) shall prevail. That fits to ILNP. That fits to making AS#s the leading part of IPv6 addres= ses. That will extend the fun with prefix building. But no one should be wondering if IPv6 won't fly like an eagle (in spite of= the IPv4 depletion issue). Heiner -----Urspr=C3=BCngliche Mitteilung-----=20 Von: Christian Huitema An: heinerhummel ; rrg Verschickt: Mi, 12 Feb 2014 8:43 am Betreff: RE: [rrg] Rebooting the RRG -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 > Today people are demonstrating against what the NSA is doing persistently= . see > http://www.sueddeutsche.de/digital/aktionstag-the-day-we-fight-back-alle-= gegen-goliath-1.1884738 > > But what can I deduct from the silence on this list? The IETF work on pervasive monitoring and its prevention is discussed in th= e=20 "perpass" mailing list: https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/perpass. Plea= se=20 feel free to join, participate, write drafts... - -- Christian Huitema -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.20 (MingW32) Comment: Using gpg4o v3.2.34.4474 - http://www.gpg4o.de/ Charset: utf-8 iQEcBAEBAgAGBQJS+yYUAAoJELba05IUOHVQREQIAKNqxc8Gr7qSbBbE8Q6waWi7 8Wj2LQjjsvgoWKSFk4vQTse4UB/3tuSXPPQF9dIj8xcf655vMBDvwd6hfofUtyFw /sZnGFXZGX7xPGUE+z3uK/b1SqYMci39dHxajK5MwpwO++wMdrvvdMzZsHIHOwtn Oav4ouS27wby/MdmvyduXeAAhKOLWllLcukcZuLsZRYemBXKnLcwNsF9Aguzl064 EkMS2hD38iC/ZjhHtKa96esyUso+tcF7yvKQYT84Njxs2mPF6hkTXt2OulXTljeq 1ykPYWTfArzlRfBZO9OHvRRgtXkPqw/xbacktn7DGEHvB50tjFm9Isdcpo+PclA=3D =3DRM3i -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- =20 ----------MB_8D0F5E56E74665A_1B18_6277D_webmail-d166.sysops.aol.com Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/html; charset="utf-8" Thank you Christian, I have just subscrib= ed successfully.
I do have= some proposal to contribute which is not of RRG relevance.

"WHERE-aw= areness or not" however would be RRG relevant. But obviously, the alternati= ve (which I like to call the DiffServ-mantra) shall prevail.
That fits= to ILNP. That fits to making AS#s the leading part of IPv6 addresses. That= will extend the fun with prefix building.
But no one should be wondering i= f IPv6 won't fly like an eagle (in spite of the IPv4 depletion issue).=

Heiner 

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

> Today people are demonstrating against what the NSA is doing persisten=
tly. see
> http://www.sueddeutsche.de/digital/aktionstag-the-day-we-fight-back-=
alle-gegen-goliath-1.1884738
>
> But what can I deduct from the silence on this list?

The IETF work on pervasive monitoring and its prevention is discussed in th=
e=20
"perpass" mailing list: https://www.ietf.org/mail=
man/listinfo/perpass. Please=20
feel free to join, participate, write drafts...

- -- Christian Huitema
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v2.0.20 (MingW32)
Comment: Using gpg4o v3.2.34.4474 - http://www.gpg4o.de/
Charset: utf-8

iQEcBAEBAgAGBQJS+yYUAAoJELba05IUOHVQREQIAKNqxc8Gr7qSbBbE8Q6waWi7
8Wj2LQjjsvgoWKSFk4vQTse4UB/3tuSXPPQF9dIj8xcf655vMBDvwd6hfofUtyFw
/sZnGFXZGX7xPGUE+z3uK/b1SqYMci39dHxajK5MwpwO++wMdrvvdMzZsHIHOwtn
Oav4ouS27wby/MdmvyduXeAAhKOLWllLcukcZuLsZRYemBXKnLcwNsF9Aguzl064
EkMS2hD38iC/ZjhHtKa96esyUso+tcF7yvKQYT84Njxs2mPF6hkTXt2OulXTljeq
1ykPYWTfArzlRfBZO9OHvRRgtXkPqw/xbacktn7DGEHvB50tjFm9Isdcpo+PclA=3D
=3DRM3i
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
----------MB_8D0F5E56E74665A_1B18_6277D_webmail-d166.sysops.aol.com-- From nobody Fri Feb 28 07:29:30 2014 Return-Path: X-Original-To: rrg@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: rrg@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 39E5E1A00DE for ; Fri, 28 Feb 2014 07:29:28 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -7.449 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-7.449 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.547, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id mO-1GlMvMLs0 for ; Fri, 28 Feb 2014 07:29:27 -0800 (PST) Received: from mx12.netapp.com (mx12.netapp.com [216.240.18.77]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 21D321A02BD for ; Fri, 28 Feb 2014 07:29:25 -0800 (PST) X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.97,562,1389772800"; d="asc'?scan'208";a="146282235" Received: from vmwexceht02-prd.hq.netapp.com ([10.106.76.240]) by mx12-out.netapp.com with ESMTP; 28 Feb 2014 07:29:22 -0800 Received: from SACEXCMBX01-PRD.hq.netapp.com ([169.254.2.211]) by vmwexceht02-prd.hq.netapp.com ([10.106.76.240]) with mapi id 14.03.0123.003; Fri, 28 Feb 2014 07:29:22 -0800 From: "Eggert, Lars" To: "rrg@irtf.org" Thread-Topic: RRG reboot breakfast Thread-Index: AQHPNJnatpRC4KsL9kSpodr1rOJwqQ== Date: Fri, 28 Feb 2014 15:29:21 +0000 Message-ID: <80BAE1D5-92D3-4761-8B36-16BA3A0B6367@netapp.com> Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: yes X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: x-originating-ip: [10.122.105.11] Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="Apple-Mail=_5A0C404A-F97E-4439-BBCA-67CE8BF6C464"; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; micalg=pgp-sha1 MIME-Version: 1.0 Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/rrg/rRdu9uojARMXAP3FxFJArOZxzR4 Subject: [rrg] RRG reboot breakfast X-BeenThere: rrg@irtf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list Reply-To: "Eggert, Lars" List-Id: IRTF Routing Research Group List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 28 Feb 2014 15:29:28 -0000 --Apple-Mail=_5A0C404A-F97E-4439-BBCA-67CE8BF6C464 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Hi, if anyone wants to chat about the RRG, I'm meeting a few folks Wed = 8:00AM for breakfast in the Hilton breakfast room. Meet at the host = podium at the restaurant. Send a unicast response if you're planning to join, just so I have a = rough idea how large a table to get. Lars --Apple-Mail=_5A0C404A-F97E-4439-BBCA-67CE8BF6C464 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="signature.asc" Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" Content-Description: Message signed with OpenPGP using GPGMail -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- iQCVAwUBUxCrT9ZcnpRveo1xAQKjoQQAsw4/naH+QJ78vZSdu4QL/jIxAEB3BiH5 Gye5/AzH6Z9A1aG50WSCzkB5ZlVts28N9pvZJgPs8I/CMnAfuR2CKzCfMMEPHyng wEzgjncT2CAgQxz9RoSFuYI12+D37r4xwxJRreYbMM/CSBlAfbF4Xu2E49JKgueX X1gp9lfn+94= =0HhO -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --Apple-Mail=_5A0C404A-F97E-4439-BBCA-67CE8BF6C464--