Well, it's a good thing we have you around to keep us honest.
On September 8, 2014 at 07:37 mo...@necom830.hpcl.titech.ac.jp (Masataka Ohta)
wrote:
> Barry Shein wrote:
>
> > Understand these were speaking notes and it was safe to assume the
> > audience basically understood DNS so it wasn
Barry Shein wrote:
> Understand these were speaking notes and it was safe to assume the
> audience basically understood DNS so it wasn't my intention to give an
> exhaustive introduction to how DNS works.
Surprisingly many people who basically understand DNS have the
same misunderstanding as you,
Understand these were speaking notes and it was safe to assume the
audience basically understood DNS so it wasn't my intention to give an
exhaustive introduction to how DNS works.
There also seems to be some splitting of hairs over the meaning of
"site" in your response. That is, some sort of phy
Barry Shein wrote:
> The idea is very simple, each site would be responsible for their own
> domain and to respond to simple remote requests for name to ip address
> mappings or back again.
Wrong. DNS is not that simple.
Domains and sites have, in general, independent topology
that sites can not
On Fri, 5 Sep 2014, Sander Steffann wrote:
> Well, you don't need addresses for clients, just for content... From
> the architecture page at http://named-data.net/project/archoverview/:
>
> "Note that neither Interest nor Data packets carry any host or
> interface addresses (such as IP addresse
>
> There would be a root, or multiple roots, which would respond to
> requests to locate who should be asked about a domain, for example if
> you want to know the ip address for world.std.com the conversation
> goes roughly:
>
>(To Root Server): Where is the COM server?
>(From Root S
On Fri, Sep 05, 2014 at 07:40:08AM -0700, Paul Ferguson wrote:
> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> Hash: SHA256
>
> On 9/5/2014 7:35 AM, Jay Ashworth wrote:
>
> > "Interface" sure.
> >
> > But the dangers of replacing actual /addresses/ with things which
> > are not is sufficiently well under
On 05/09/14 07:16, Jay Ashworth wrote:
> How many Youtube subject tags will fit in *your* routers' TCAM?
>
>
> http://tech.slashdot.org/story/14/09/04/2156232/ucla-cisco-more-launch-consortium-to-replace-tcpip
>
> [ Can someone convince me this isn't the biggest troll in the history
> of the
On Fri, Sep 5, 2014 at 3:27 PM, Murat Yuksel wrote:
> As far as I understand, NDN's basic premise is to
> install "names" into the network layer.
Hi Murat,
If they think names belong at layer 4 instead of layer 7 I can offer a
couple insights on how this might be used to make layer 3 cheaper and
> From: Jay Ashworth
> It sounds to me like they want to put *Google* in every router.
>
> Cause no one who posits this stuff has, apparently, ever had to do network
> diagnosis.
Probably more focussed on selling you your internet keyword
brandon
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA256
On 9/5/2014 12:49 PM, valdis.kletni...@vt.edu wrote:
> On Fri, 05 Sep 2014 12:38:13 -0700, Paul Ferguson said:
>> The principle questions still stand unanswered:
>>
>> What is the motivation for this? What do you gain? Does it create
>> some large
On Fri, 05 Sep 2014 12:38:13 -0700, Paul Ferguson said:
> The principle questions still stand unanswered:
>
> What is the motivation for this? What do you gain? Does it create some
> large architectural and performance in efficiency?
How often do the copyright owners on content give a flying fig
On Sep 5, 2014, at 12:21 PM, Sander Steffann wrote:
> Hi,
>
>> How many Youtube subject tags will fit in *your* routers' TCAM?
>>
>> http://tech.slashdot.org/story/14/09/04/2156232/ucla-cisco-more-launch-consortium-to-replace-tcpip
>>
>> [ Can someone convince me this isn't the biggest troll
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA256
The principle questions still stand unanswered:
What is the motivation for this? What do you gain? Does it create some
large architectural and performance in efficiency?
- - ferg
On 9/5/2014 12:27 PM, Murat Yuksel wrote:
> As far as I understand,
As far as I understand, NDN's basic premise is to install "names" into the
network layer. I don't think they (the NDN inventors) consider it as a new
"app" at this point, even tough eventually it may merely stay as a new app.
I think the final thing that will determine the success of NDN is whet
- Original Message -
> From: "Sander Steffann"
> > How many Youtube subject tags will fit in *your* routers' TCAM?
> >
> >
> > http://tech.slashdot.org/story/14/09/04/2156232/ucla-cisco-more-launch-consortium-to-replace-tcpip
> >
> > [ Can someone convince me this isn't the biggest trol
Hi,
> How many Youtube subject tags will fit in *your* routers' TCAM?
>
>
> http://tech.slashdot.org/story/14/09/04/2156232/ucla-cisco-more-launch-consortium-to-replace-tcpip
>
> [ Can someone convince me this isn't the biggest troll in the history
> of the internet? Cause it sounds like shoe
Here¹s my $0.02. I¹m only going to touch on a small part of what I
understand NDN to be‹ namely making caching a first class citizen of the
network. When you think about the types of traffic currently carried over
our collective networks, there might be value if the network eco system
more nati
Interesting, here are my speaking notes from a talk I gave at
Hackerspace/SG in June 2011. Slightly different but in a similar
spirit depending on your sense of "similar":
THE END OF DNS
A Quick History
The internet uses host names but routing is done based on
numer
On Fri, Sep 5, 2014 at 10:16 AM, Jay Ashworth wrote:
>
> http://tech.slashdot.org/story/14/09/04/2156232/ucla-cisco-more-launch-consortium-to-replace-tcpip
>
> Can someone convince me this isn't the biggest troll in the history
> of the internet?
Not me. The description of the thing wanders in
On (2014-09-05 14:58 +), Gary Dunaway wrote:
> Given how long the process has been to go from IPv4 to IPv6, I would imagine
> something like this taking much longer to take root and spread out to the
> masses. It is a curious concept though and the papers written on the
> consortium site ma
>> How many Youtube subject tags will fit in *your* routers' TCAM?
>>
>> http://tech.slashdot.org/story/14/09/04/2156232/ucla-cisco-more-launch
>> -consortium-to-replace-tcpip
>>
>> [ Can someone convince me this isn't the biggest troll in the history
>> of the internet? Cause it sounds like s
On 09/05/2014 08:40 AM, Paul Ferguson wrote:
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA256
On 9/5/2014 7:35 AM, Jay Ashworth wrote:
"Interface" sure.
But the dangers of replacing actual /addresses/ with things which
are not is sufficiently well understood that even Van Jacobson
ought to kn
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA256
On 9/5/2014 7:35 AM, Jay Ashworth wrote:
> "Interface" sure.
>
> But the dangers of replacing actual /addresses/ with things which
> are not is sufficiently well understood that even Van Jacobson
> ought to know about 'em, right? :-)
>
Compare &
"Interface" sure.
But the dangers of replacing actual /addresses/ with things which are not is
sufficiently well understood that even Van Jacobson ought to know about 'em,
right? :-)
On September 5, 2014 10:27:18 AM EDT, Paul Ferguson
wrote:
>-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
>Hash: SHA256
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA256
On 9/5/2014 7:16 AM, Jay Ashworth wrote:
> How many Youtube subject tags will fit in *your* routers' TCAM?
>
> http://tech.slashdot.org/story/14/09/04/2156232/ucla-cisco-more-launch-consortium-to-replace-tcpip
>
> [ Can someone convince me this is
26 matches
Mail list logo
