Hi Dino, all, Based on a user point of view, I try to go through the thread and summarize the features gathered. Please correct me if anything missing or I get anything wrong. (Points like 6M mentioned by Fred are shaped to better reflect the points from users.)
(1) Always-On: be connected to the Internet, Anywhere, by Any links (either cabled or radio), ALL THE TIME, and All automatically (without any switch turning). (2) Transparency: be agnostic to the network protocols (IP, Bluetooth, ZigBee, Thread, Airdrop, Airplay, or any others), want an easy and straightforward to contact a people/device without any knowledge of network issues like IP address, and (3) Multi-homing: seamlessly multi-homing capability for the host. (4) Mobility: seamless and lossless communications for moving nodes (vehicle, satellites). (5) Security and Privacy: security and privacy, omnidirectionally, incessantly (6) Performance: satisfied (if not impeccable) reliability, availability, speed(shorter paths/direct communications), enough bandwidth(10petabit/s for a link), Efficient(less overlays/encapsulations), highly effective (avoid address waste). (7) Kernel: make sure the Internet does no harm. (8) Others: no worry about MTU Thanks, Yihao Jia -----Original Message----- From: Dino Farinacci <farina...@gmail.com> Sent: 2021年12月8日 21:36 To: Jiayihao <jiayi...@huawei.com> Cc: int-area@ietf.org Subject: Re: Side meeting follow-up: What exact features do we want from the Internet? > [jiayihao] Here I mean our data is controlled by our service provider not > user themselves. For example, if I bought a movie X from an online streaming > provider A, I still do not own this movie X and have to pay again if I want > to watch movie X from online streaming provider B. However, I am not that > sure if it can be categorized to a network requirement. This is certainly an application specific issue. Not network layer. But if you are watching a movie and move from your house to your car and switch from wifi to LTE/5G, the movie should continue playing. That is where the network layer provides seamless connectivity and the app doesn't know that anything has changed (and hence why the apps use sockets that bind to non-topological addresses (i.e. EIDs)). > (4) Similar to your first point: I want to be always attached to the Internet > by any personal devices. (then I can better enjoy the features above) > > Yes. > >> Here I have another question: application developer/programmer should have a >> different angle for new features. Of course application developer/programmer >> should to be agnostic (or learn as less as possible) to network stuffs >> during developing, but definitely they have more insights and more details >> shall be learned by them. > > App developers control user behavior by making their services/functionality > available with good UI. Make it easy for the user to get do things with the > fewest number of steps. A counter example is the Facebook iOS app. > > [jiayihao] Agree that App developers should not care about network stuff like > the session continuity during device movement. However, App developers do > learn things like URL, domain names, DNS, Quic, CDN, proxies.....,and make > them transparent behind the good UI. So there do have some network stuffs > that are agnostic to users but are not agnostic to App developers. Right, and they should bind/map to EIDs. Meaning, when application handles or directories map to IP addresses, they are not topological addresses. > [jiayihao] My observation is: If we consider network features/requirements > from App developers, it will finally result in discussion about the network > architecture. No, my experience is that apps bind to names. The app developers have enough fish to fry, they don't want to deal with network specific issues. They just want to out sockets to send and receive. Just have a look at all the new Dapps being written. Dino _______________________________________________ Int-area mailing list Int-area@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/int-area
