Subject: [P2Prg] [Fwd: Open architecture discussion list -- Scoped Address Architecture]

From: Jeffrey Altman <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 15 Oct 2003 08:46:39 -0700

The following discussion list appears to have relevance to our work in 
the P2P space. 

Jeffrey Altman

Subject: Open architecture discussion list -- Scoped Address Architecture
From: Leslie Daigle <[email-masked]>
To: IETF-Announce: ;
Date: Wed, 15 Oct 2003 09:21:08 -0400

 Following the IAB Open Architecture meeting at the Vienna
 IETF, the IAB proposed the creation of a mailing list forum
 for further discussion of the architectural topics raised.

 See below for the charter and particulars of that mailing
 list forum, which is now open for subscription and participation.

 Thanks,

 Leslie,
 for the IAB.

 Scoped Address Architecture Discussion list

 List: [email-masked]
 Subscribe: [email-masked]
 Moderator: Eric Rescorla

 We have specified an Internet that works, at the network layer,
 using relatively stable but not permanent identifiers for connection
 endpoints, which are allocated and administered using a topology 
 dependent model, implying a service provider dependent model.

 But we run into problems (the architecture doesn't quite fit) when
 we try to address some scenarios encountered in real life:

         . multihoming
         . assembling a local network without necessarily
             having to contact an ISP to obtain address space
             (e.g., home net)
         . renumbering local networks without significant pain
         . working with wireless networks, where the concept of "link"
             can be quite fuzzy

 Some proposed solutions are challenged in terms of:

         . providing referential integrity - how is referential
             integrity maintained when identifiers are not globally
             unique or are overloaded?
         . choosing between different identifiers for an object which
             has different "reachability" and the reachability is
             context-dependent
         . security/transiting trust in layered address
             resolution
         . providing solutions that work across all layers of
             the stack and all areas - how do we find a solution
             that is great for routing but also great for security?

 The purpose of this mailing list is to identify and clarify the types of 
 problems we are encountering with the current architecture, and
 to debate the merits of approaches that:

         . provide scoping at the IP layer
         . provide scoping at some other (single) layer
         . provide new addressing paradigms that span several layers

 Out of scope for this discussion list are:

         . discussions of specific proposed "solutions" (except as
             illustrations for discussing problem types, and merits of
             general approaches)

---

From: Bill Yeager <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 15 Oct 2003 09:52:55 -0700 (PDT)

Looks like there is overlap. I'm not sure if the goals are the same though.

Bill

_______________________________________________
P2prg mailing list
[email-masked]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/p2prg

---

From: Jeffrey Altman <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 15 Oct 2003 13:29:44 -0700

Clearly they are not solving the whole P2P equation.  However, they are 
attempting to restore end to end connectivity as well as break the 
address bindings.  So in a sense they are looking at forming overlay 
networks.  What they appear not to be doing are addressing questions of 
group contexts for identity, authorization, service provisioning, and 
network virtualization. 

Jeff

---

From: Bill Yeager <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 15 Oct 2003 14:25:32 -0700 (PDT)

| Clearly they are not solving the whole P2P equation.  However, they are 
| attempting to restore end to end connectivity as well as break the 
| address bindings.  So in a sense they are looking at forming overlay 
| networks.  

Yep. Agreed. I am curious to exactly where all of that fits in with IP.V6
which if fully deployed could restore end-to-end connectivity. In any case, I
don't see a conflict with what we are doing for overlays.

What interests me even more is how they will evolve the routing protocols for
these addresses they are thinking about proposing.

Bill

---

From: Sam Joseph <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 16 Oct 2003 11:08:04 +0900

Hi All,

Sam Joseph here.  Great to meet all of you who attended the 1st P2Prg 
meeting last Monday.  Sorry that I wasn't able to hang out afterwards 
and get to know you guys better - too many deadlines this week - 
hopefully we'll have more social time next meeting.

Anyway so as I mentioned at the meeting I have some spare wiki space 
that we can use if we feel so inclined - I started a little page at the 
following location:

http://www.neurogrid.net/twiki/bin/view/Main/PeerToPeerResearchGroup

It's not much at the moment, but I thought it better to put up 
something.  I have a lot to work on this week preparing a paper to 
summarise some different p2p simulators (including my own simulator 
software), so it might be a couple of days before I can really add much 
to this page - but then this is a wiki - feel free to add whatever you like.

At the moment the layout is not fancy, but I have found that Twiki is 
pretty good at supporting multiple users, image uploads, various html 
and wiki formatting etc. If the wiki becomes a popular location I can 
add some of the layout plugins that will give us better overall navigation.

Anyways, you may also be interested in another part of the wiki, 
something that has grown out of the decentralization mailing list to 
track different p2p related conferences:

http://www.neurogrid.net/twiki/bin/view/Main/PeerToPeerConferences

Also, as I mentioned in the meeting I wrote a summary of different 
meta-data strategies for p2p systems, which is the 2nd publication in 
the following page (apologies for the dodgy English in the abstract):

http://www.neurogrid.net/php/publications.php

and I have another review paper on p2p reputation systems in the 
planning stages.

Looking forward to getting some P2Prg ideas on paper ..., or as ascii, 
or ...anyways we'll see what develops.

CHEERS> SAM