[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

RE: draft-bonica-tunneltrace-02



Title: RE: draft-bonica-tunneltrace-02

Tom & co...

I have to admit I am not finding some of these arguments to be consistent......

If traceroute is an excellent example of a protocol that works, why not simply re-use it. Genericize Ron's proposal for MPLS extensions to ICMP and you're done. No more justification or requirements required.

If the intent is to fix shortcomings with traceroute by inventing a new protocol, then all bets should be off, because you are saying the working example of a good solution is broken or lacking in some way. And the requirements document should cover in detail the problems to be solved (or re-solved as the case may be e.g. broadcast filtering etc.). In this regard I would consider the requirements document to be seriously lacking.

Now process wise, if the intent is to have the cart before the horse (or it is that way accidentally or for some historical reasons), why are not the requirements and the solution proposed as WG documents simultaneously?...they are joined at the hip anyway. If the actual binding is not so simple, then the specific dependencies between the two should be eliminated before this is a genuine "work item".

my last two cents
Dave

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Thomas D. Nadeau [mailto:tnadeau@cisco.com]
> Sent: Tuesday, March 05, 2002 3:56 PM
> To: Shahram Davari
> Cc: 'Ron Bonica'; erosen@cisco.com; Allan, David [CAR:NS00:EXCH];
> ccamp@ops.ietf.org
> Subject: RE: draft-bonica-tunneltrace-02
>
>
> At 12:25 PM 3/5/2002 -0800, Shahram Davari wrote:
> >Ron,
> >
> > > We should not be surprised that
> > > the enhanced
> > > route tracing application resembles the current "traceroute"
> > > in that a) it
> > > is based upon probes and responses, b) UDP carries its PDUs,
> > > and c) it is
> > > stateless.
> > >
> >
> >I am not surprised at all. What you are suggesting is
> >your desire to resemble the IP traceroute. But this is only
> >a desire and there is no technical reason why it should or it
> >should not resemble the IP traceroute.
>
>          Sure there is; IP traceroute works.  This is one of
> the best reasons
> in my mind.
>
>          --Tom
>
>
> >A requirements document should leave the door open for other
> >innovative ideas, unless you can prove that the traceroute-like
> >mechanism is the BEST.
> >
> >-Shahram
>
>
>
> --------------------------------------------------------------
> ----------
> Mathematics is the supreme nostalgia of our time.
>
>