Subject: [Architecture-discuss] Overall open architectural issues

From: Leslie Daigle <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 26 Oct 2005 17:51:55 -0400

[I'm forwarding Pekka Nikander's suggested topic-starters, one at a
time, to see if we can get some "discuss" going, about "architecture".
  -- LLD]

[Pekka wrote:]
3. Overall open architectural issues

Some IAB members have been collecting open architectural issues for a 
while,
with the intention of bringing up an up to date collection of 
information at a
later date, probably in a form of a WikiPedia-like  web site.  This work is
going on, and we'd like to get as much  information as possible from the 
wider
community.  Hence, suggestions  on what are the more pressing 
longer-term open
issues are very  welcome.  To given an idea of the current issues so far
identified,  here is a partial list.  The list doesn't say much without
explanation, but it may give an idea of the type of issues we are 
looking at.

End-to-end connectivity
=======================

The original value of the Internet, the ability to connect to any  host with
any protocol, has eroded away during the last decade. While  it is 
impossible to
get back to the original mode of operation,  largely due to security 
reasons,
some form of better-than-today end- to-end connectivity would be very 
valuable.

o Living with NATs, filters, and firewalls
o Introducing identity realms or domains
o Evolving the application interface (API)

End-user experience
===================
o Transparent security
o Zero Configuration and Service Discovery

Balancing Accessibility, Security, and Privacy
==============================================
o System for plausible sender identity for received packets
o Secure self-configuration
o Integrating security across the stack
o Dealing with bad traffic

_______________________________________________
Architecture-discuss mailing list
[email-masked]
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/architecture-discuss

---

From: "JFC (Jefsey) Morfin" <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 27 Oct 2005 04:15:07 +0200

Dear Leslie and all,
this new mailing list is a new exercise. May I suggest an initial 
suggestion and explain my - often controverted approach? I am 
interested in usage architecture. I am not much concerned therefore 
by layers 1-7, but I learned over Tymnet, OSI, Internet that the 
architectural culture has a dramatic simplification impact on usage 
architecture. This is why I need global consistency and quality of 
the IETF deliverables. And I am excited by this list. I see two main needs:

- architectural coordination between diversified propositions from 
different WG. Probably the largest demand.
- reduction of the Internet proposition to a much simpler and 
powerful one, in having architecture as a priority. Like when one 
cleans an old city and build new, open, wide avenues. The most 
interesting issue.

I have read your two other mails. No to say something stupid about 
what is quoted, I would need to spend one or two years in a few WG I 
am interested only in a very side aspect. May be could we agree that 
everything discussed should be accompanied of the a URL summarising 
the current state of the art/thinking of the matter in a few lines 
and further links. I am sure it would help me, and probably a few 
other ones. May such a notes could be hosted by IAB and made part of 
the current effort to document the IETF work?

To explain my ignorance, my interest in core issue and my possible 
unexpected positions, I must explain that my current effort (for 
already 4 years of usage architecture oriented work) consists in 
starting from what I name a "corebox". This is the core of a user 
network system. And then to investigate what I need to address each 
of my needs, discussing the simplest, most robust, most consistent, 
most scalable way to get it. The needs starts with my small 
network/home network and extend to a global coverage of the whole 
digital ecosystem and to all its partners. Whatever the technology 
(Internet, phone, TV, radio, CD, printed mail, etc..), whatever the 
language and culture (my core language is not English). This 
user-centric approach is certainly different. It does not covers 
everything. But I learned that looking at the same thing from a 
different point of view, often helped a lot. At least it will explain 
the silly remarks I will make and the dumb priorities and interests I may have.

jfc

---

From: Fred Baker <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 27 Oct 2005 08:26:58 -0400

Without gainsaying anything you said, I'd like to know more  
specifically what you're looking for. What problems would you like to  
see solved, and what are the "usage architecture" issues that affect  
the solutions?

---

From: Stephane Bortzmeyer <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 27 Oct 2005 15:06:50 +0200

On Thu, Oct 27, 2005 at 08:26:58AM -0400,
 Fred Baker <[email-masked]> wrote 
 a message of 21 lines which said:

> specifically what you're looking for.

Sine it is difficult to find a mailing list where Jefsey Morfin does
not send ten messages a day, I suggest at least not to answer him for
the reasons explained here:

http://www.alvestrand.no/ietf/jefsey-pr-action.php

---

From: "JFC (Jefsey) Morfin" <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 27 Oct 2005 23:14:54 +0200

>see solved, and what are the "usage architecture" issues that affect

Dear Fred,
Usage architecture (or name as you want the way users may 
architecture their own convergent usage of the various technologies) 
depends from the individual and community demands and on the 
underlaying architectural propositions. The changes in these 
underlaying technologies may greatly affect them.

I see that solutions affect usage architecture. But obviously 
considering them may lead the proposition of more adequate solutions 
what would be great.

I am not sure you want to discuss this now: it may concern a lot of 
aspects (you live for as many years with the IETF approach as I do 
with that interest). Quoting most might be confused. But I am 
certainly interested in issues like a better understanding of the 
edge vs. the end, distributed registries, multilingualism 
(universalisation vs. internationalisation), samert and universal 
numbering plans, hybrid solutions, extended networking model, 
architectural parametering and structuring, reducting option and 
kludge, information networking, telco rotation, etc.

This is not so much architecture, but side aspects would be highly 
beneficial to us like appeal of charters, state of the art current 
documentation,

jfc