Subject: Re: [rrg] Multiple critiques, choice of single proposal, consensus on constraints due to voluntary adoption?

From: [email-masked] (Noel Chiappa)
Date: Sat, 30 Jan 2010 13:29:37 -0500 (EST)

> From: Robin Whittle <[email-masked]>

    > I think Noel wants both included.

Ah, not really. I don't really care whether both, or just one, are included.

	Noel

---

From: "Flinck, Hannu (NSN - FI/Espoo)" <[email-masked]>
Date: Sat, 30 Jan 2010 23:23:01 +0200

The most debated CES proposals differ in the need and functionality of the mapping system.  Maybe that is also the case for CEE, I don't know.

Nonetheless the characteristics of the mapping system has turned to be a critical decision point when comapring different proposals supporting locator identity separation. It would seem to be benwficial and useful to document that discussion in some form.

Yours
Hannu

--- original message ---
From: "Noel Chiappa" <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: [rrg] Multiple critiques, choice of single proposal,consensus on constraints due to voluntary adoption?
Date: 30th January 2010
Time: 8:40:28 pm

    > From: "Joel M. Halpern" <[email-masked]>

    > I can not foresee any process which would come to an actual agreement
    > on a recommendation from the RRG, and therefore conclude that the
    > survey is probably the most effective outcome we can achieve as a
    > community.

While I agree there's probably not agreement of a specific technical
proposal, what about architectural direction(s)? E.g. I thought we did have
rough consensus on the need for the separation of location and identity?

True, the workshop a couple of years back (Amsterdam?) I think already
recommended this, so we're not breaking a lot of new ground there; still, it
would be useful to re-affirm that conclusion, in a larger group.

And how about IPv4 support? Is a solution which doesn't support IPv4 judged to
be plausible? Do most people agree with that one?

Also, can we say anything about CEE/CES? I think a lot of people think that
CES is sort of necessary for the short term, because any solution will never
really get deployed otherwise. At the same time, there appear to be reasons
that a solution has to be able to migrate in the CEE direction in the long
term. I don't know how many agree with these, but it might be worth exploring
that.

Any others?

	Noel
_______________________________________________
rrg mailing list
[email-masked]
http://www.irtf.org/mailman/listinfo/rrg

---

From: [email-masked] (Noel Chiappa)
Date: Sun, 31 Jan 2010 17:33:39 -0500 (EST)

> Noel wrote:

    >>  I don't really care whether both, or just one, are included.

    > so I understand acceptable to him and me for my critique to remain in
    > the Report.

Do note that I was speaking purely to the _number_, not _which_.

	Noel