- make sure the Internet does no harm.
- use shorter paths and not artificially-long paths like with VPN
gateways, video session rdv points. Use more direct communications
- accommodate more bandwidth: 10petabit/s for a link.
- reduce the number of overlays. Reduce the encapsulations, like IPv6-
in-IPv4 and others.
- make it easier to avoid address waste.
- promote Internet to space and inter-planetary.
Le 01/12/2021 à 09:52, Dirk Trossen a écrit :
Dear all,
Many thanks for those participating in the side meeting on Internet
addressing during the IETF 112 week. As suggested during the meeting, we
want to take various points of discussion during the meeting onto the
mailing list to continue discussion here on possible ways forward.
Specifically, we wanted to come back on the issue that a larger
architectural discussion may be needed, a point that we make towards the
end of the GA
draft*//*(https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-jia-intarea-internet-addressing-gap-analysis/
<https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-jia-intarea-internet-addressing-gap-analysis/>),
but which was also core to Dirk K’s main point that only such
architecture discussion may lead to possibly needed changes to
addressing. We will be looking into such possibly larger discussion
along different possible avenues.
For our discussion here on the INT area list, we found Dino’s related
suggestion particularly useful in that we may need a discussion on what
we (as users) may want from a network. We feel that our current GA draft
may contribute to this question by observing that the many extensions to
Internet addressing that we have gathered so far may be seen as an
expression of a desired feature that those proposing the extension may
want to see from the network. Hence, in addition to positioning those
extensions as identified gaps to Internet addressing, we may want to
formulate those extensions as desired features towards an extended
Internet system, not just addressing; this can be done through suitably
extending the GA draft with another section.
Why is this useful? We think that such view provides an observational
input into the question that Dino suggests to answer, which in turn
links to the larger architectural discussion that Dirk K suggests to
have. While the overall architectural discussion may (and likely will)
touch on more than ‘just’ addressing, we as a community may contribute
to the discussion by rationalizing the work that has been done in this
space.
We would like to solicit thoughts on this proposed way forward as
concrete steps for the community here on the list. Also, anybody wanting
to provide concrete input and contribution to this proposed revision of
the draft is more than welcome.
Best,
Dirk
(on behalf of the co-authors)
_______________________________________________
Int-area mailing list
Int-area@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/int-area
_______________________________________________
Int-area mailing list
Int-area@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/int-area
