[Fwd: draft charter for SAddArch (Scoped Address Architecture) discussion list]

[Leslie Daigle <leslie@thinkingcat.com>]

Howdy,

As mentioned on today's IESG call, this is the charter for the as-yet-unannounced
saad discussion list.  The original goal was to provide a venue for follow-up
to the open architecture meeting in Vienna.  A general discussion list in
this area seems needed.  

As I also mentioned, this seems to have some relation to (but is not an
alternative for) the HIP BoF.  Insight into whether or how to position this
so that people know which discussions to take where would be helpful.

Also, prior to announcing the discussion list, the IAB had discussed seeding
it with some considered notes from teh open architecture meeting.  Mark
Handley has drafted some.  I've expressed some concern that they may
inadvertently take the discussion back down the site local rathole, but that
may be my own lack of insight in that area talking.

Mark, would you be willing to share your draft with the IESG for further
discussion about the best tactic for ensuring we keep a useful space for
saad, and don't inadvertently take the IETF community back down a familiar
rathole?

Leslie.

-------- Original Message --------
Subject: draft charter for SAddArch (Scoped Address Architecture) discussion list
Date: Tue, 12 Aug 2003 02:00:11 -0400
From: Leslie Daigle <leslie@thinkingcat.com>
To: iab@ietf.org


*DRAFT*DRAFT*DRAFT*DRAFT*DRAFT*DRAFT*DRAFT*DRAFT*DRAFT*DRAFT*DRAFT

We have specified an Internet that works, at the network layer,
using relatively stable but not permanent identifiers for connection
endpoints, which are allocated and administered using a topology dependent
model, implying a service provider dependent model.

But we run into problems (the architecture doesn't quite fit) when
we try to address some scenarios encountered in real life:

   . multihoming
   . assembling a local network without necessarily
     having to contact an ISP to obtain address space
     (e.g., home net)
   . renumbering local networks without significant pain
   . working with wireless networks, where the concept of "link"
     can be quite fuzzy

Some proposed solutions are challenged in terms of:

   . providing referential integrity - how is referential
     integrity maintained when identifiers are not globally
     unique or are overloaded?
   . choosing between different identifiers for an object which
     has different "reachability" and the reachability is
     context-dependent
   . security/transiting trust in layered address
     resolution 
   . providing solutions that work across all layers of
     the stack and all areas - how do we find a solution
     that is great for routing but also great for security?

The purpose of this mailing list is to identify and clarify the types of 
problems we are encountering with the current architecture, and
to debate the merits of approaches that:

   . provide scoping at the IP layer
   . provide scoping at some other (single) layer
   . provide new addressing paradigms that span several layers

Out of scope for this discussion list are:

   . discussions of specific proposed "solutions" (except as
     illustrations for discussing problem types, and merits of
     general approaches)

--

-------------------------------------------------------------------
"Reality:
     Yours to discover."
                                -- ThinkingCat 

Leslie Daigle
leslie@thinkingcat.com
-------------------------------------------------------------------




--

-------------------------------------------------------------------
"Reality:
     Yours to discover."
                                -- ThinkingCat 

Leslie Daigle
leslie@thinkingcat.com
-------------------------------------------------------------------