[e2e] Discrete IP - retake
Pars Mutaf
pars.mutaf at gmail.com
Wed Sep 19 02:31:05 PDT 2012
On Wed, Sep 19, 2012 at 11:34 AM, Jon Crowcroft
<Jon.Crowcroft at cl.cam.ac.uk>wrote:
> in a typical disaster scenario, many of whuch have been studied in
> great detail, people have to make do with resources they have to
> hand
>
> they may be spread over a large area (e.g all of indonesia, japan,
> california) and not be prepared with giant ballons as you desribed
>
>
Preparing the balloons is not the users' task of course.
Organizations like red cross will prepare them.
> what many DO have is phones and laptops.
>
> manets can be usefully built out of these.
>
>
MANET may not work for isolated users in a disaster scenario
because they are too far away from the rest of the network.
So MANET is not only useless, it has a very low probability to work.
> in a military scenario i menion, your giant ballon idea is a great
> target for the other side
>
I personally do not argue for the army.. This is not really research,
because they do obscure things that we do not even know. They can just
use the most expensive satellite phones. They do not care.
>
> in the vehicular scenario i menion, a giant ballon would be a big
> drag, especially when you go through tunnels and under bridges.
>
>
Vehicular networks are *unnecessarily dangerous*. Just use the
infrastructure
network.
> your move, sunshine.
>
> In missive <CACQuieY3JBSFUvL_ugse4VRhT4xofOHyZZdvRHNdt+JzTx6F5g at mail.gmail.
> com>, Pars Mutaf typed:
>
> >>--20cf307f39aa2712b204ca091b8d
> >>Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
> >>
> >>You do not question enough Jon. See:
> >>
> >>http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/manet/current/msg12602.html
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>On Wed, Sep 19, 2012 at 10:17 AM, Jon Crowcroft
> >><jon.crowcroft at cl.cam.ac.uk>wrote:
> >>
> >>> Take the MANET example, sure. Many use cases exist since ARPA Packet
> radio
> >>> days. Battlefield networks, disaster recovery networks, vehicular
> >>> networks...some actually in use ad deployed.
> >>>
> >>> The internet isn't for just one thing.it is, by definition, for
> anything
> >>> we can imagine and realize...it is the union of all communications,
> not the
> >>> intersection of one notion with one technology.
> >>> On 18 Sep 2012 17:48, "Pars Mutaf" <pars.mutaf at gmail.com> wrote:
> >>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> On Tue, Sep 18, 2012 at 7:17 PM, Jon Crowcroft <
> >>>> Jon.Crowcroft at cl.cam.ac.uk> wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>>> this is what we used to talk about as the
> >>>>> "my problem is too hard even for you" poser syndrome
> >>>>>
> >>>>> basically, whenever you offer a workable solution,
> >>>>> the poser (of the problem) changes the
> >>>>> problem (or the assumptions)
> >>>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> No I didn't change the problem:
> >>>>
> >>>> What do we want for the Internet? Did we really ask this question?
> >>>>
> >>>> Take MANET for example, they did not ask themselves what it is used
> for.
> >>>> They cannot explain.
> >>>>
> >>>> I would start a new thread "What do we want for the Internet" but I
> am
> >>>> not sure if I should do this.
> >>>>
> >>>> Cheers,
> >>>> Pars
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>> one of the nice things about IP (and the E2E argument(s))
> >>>>> is that it is really hard to change the problem it solves
> >>>>> in a way it still doesn't solve, whichever version you choose
> >>>>> (well, ok, maybe not IPv5:)
> >>>>>
> >>>>> In missive <50589DCC.2030808 at dcrocker.net>, Dave Crocker typed:
> >>>>>
> >>>>> >>
> >>>>> >>On 9/18/2012 3:35 AM, Jon Crowcroft wrote:
> >>>>> >>> In missive <
> >>>>> CACQuiebE-sXDZD-xxaeC2iWfM58iDwO+V2XV1tFcP5PgT+Vq2A at mail.gmail.com>,
> Par
> >>>>> >>> s Mutaf typed:
> >>>>> >>>
> >>>>> >>> >>> I encourage you to read the relevant prior work (many
> >>>>> pointers were given)
> >>>>> >>> >>Only 1 pointer was given (by Jon Crowcroft), it is not
> relevant.
> >>>>> >>>
> >>>>> >>> it is exactly relevant.
> >>>>> >>
> >>>>> >>
> >>>>> >>in the broader sense of whether this thread has been, or has any
> hope
> >>>>> of
> >>>>> >>being, constructive, it was not relevant...
> >>>>> >>
> >>>>> >>d/
> >>>>> >>
> >>>>> >>--
> >>>>> >> Dave Crocker
> >>>>> >> Brandenburg InternetWorking
> >>>>> >> bbiw.net
> >>>>>
> >>>>> cheers
> >>>>>
> >>>>> jon
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> --
> >>>> http://www.content-based-science.org
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>
> >>
> >>--
> >>http://www.content-based-science.org
> >>
> >>--20cf307f39aa2712b204ca091b8d
> >>Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1
> >>Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
> >>
> >>You do not question enough Jon. See:<br><br><a href=3D"
> http://www.ietf.org/=
> >>mail-archive/web/manet/current/msg12602.html">
> http://www.ietf.org/mail-arch=
> >>ive/web/manet/current/msg12602.html</a><br><br><br><br><div
> class=3D"gmail_=
> >>quote">
> >>On Wed, Sep 19, 2012 at 10:17 AM, Jon Crowcroft <span
> dir=3D"ltr"><<a hr=
> >>ef=3D"mailto:jon.crowcroft at cl.cam.ac.uk"
> target=3D"_blank">jon.crowcroft at cl=
> >>.cam.ac.uk</a>></span> wrote:<br><blockquote class=3D"gmail_quote"
> style=
> >>=3D"margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
> >><p>Take the MANET example, sure. Many use cases exist since ARPA Packet
> rad=
> >>io days. Battlefield networks, disaster recovery networks, vehicular
> networ=
> >>ks...some actually in use ad deployed.</p>
> >><p>The internet isn't for just one <a href=3D"http://thing.it"
> target=
> >>=3D"_blank">thing.it</a> is, by definition, for anything we can
> imagine and=
> >> realize...it is the union of all communications, not the intersection
> of o=
> >>ne notion with one technology.</p>
> >>
> >>
> >><div class=3D"gmail_quote">On 18 Sep 2012 17:48, "Pars Mutaf"
> <=
> >>;<a href=3D"mailto:pars.mutaf at gmail.com"
> target=3D"_blank">pars.mutaf at gmail=
> >>.com</a>> wrote:<br type=3D"attribution"><blockquote
> class=3D"gmail_quot=
> >>e" style=3D"margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc
> solid;padding-left:1ex">
> >>
> >><br><br><div class=3D"gmail_quote">On Tue, Sep 18, 2012 at 7:17 PM, Jon
> Cro=
> >>wcroft <span dir=3D"ltr"><<a href=3D"mailto:
> Jon.Crowcroft at cl.cam.ac.uk" =
> >>target=3D"_blank">Jon.Crowcroft at cl.cam.ac.uk</a>></span>
> wrote:<br><bloc=
> >>kquote class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px
> #cc=
> >>c solid;padding-left:1ex">
> >>
> >>
> >>this is what we used to talk about as the<br>
> >>"my problem is too hard even for you" poser syndrome<br>
> >><br>
> >>basically, whenever you offer a workable solution,<br>
> >>the poser (of the problem) changes the<br>
> >>problem (or the assumptions)<br></blockquote><div><br>No I didn't
> chang=
> >>e the problem:<br><br>What do we want for the Internet? Did we really
> ask t=
> >>his question?<br><br>Take MANET for example, they did not ask
> themselves wh=
> >>at it is used for. They cannot explain. <br>
> >>
> >>
> >><br>I would start a new thread "What do we want for the
> Internet"=
> >>=A0 but I am not sure if I should do this. <br><br>Cheers,
> <br>Pars<br>=A0<=
> >>br></div><blockquote class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"margin:0pt 0pt 0pt
> 0.8e=
> >>x;border-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex">
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >><br>
> >>one of the nice things about IP (and the E2E argument(s))<br>
> >>is that it is really hard to change the problem it solves<br>
> >>in a way it still doesn't solve, whichever version you choose<br>
> >>(well, ok, maybe not IPv5:)<br>
> >><br>
> >>In missive <<a href=3D"mailto:50589DCC.2030808 at dcrocker.net"
> target=3D"_=
> >>blank">50589DCC.2030808 at dcrocker.net</a>>, Dave Crocker typed:<br>
> >><div><div><br>
> >>=A0>><br>
> >>=A0>>On 9/18/2012 3:35 AM, Jon Crowcroft wrote:<br>
> >>=A0>>> In missive <<a href=3D"mailto:
> CACQuiebE-sXDZD-xxaeC2iWfM=
> >>58iDwO%2BV2XV1tFcP5PgT%2BVq2A at mail.gmail.com"
> target=3D"_blank">CACQuiebE-s=
> >>XDZD-xxaeC2iWfM58iDwO+V2XV1tFcP5PgT+Vq2A at mail.gmail.com</a>>,
> Par<br>
> >>=A0>>> s Mutaf typed:<br>
> >>=A0>>><br>
> >>=A0>>> =A0 >>> I encourage you to read the relevant
> prior=
> >> work (many pointers were given)<br>
> >>=A0>>> =A0 >>Only 1 pointer was given (by Jon
> Crowcroft), it=
> >> is not relevant.<br>
> >>=A0>>><br>
> >>=A0>>> it is exactly relevant.<br>
> >>=A0>><br>
> >>=A0>><br>
> >>=A0>>in the broader sense of whether this thread has been, or has
> any=
> >> hope of<br>
> >>=A0>>being, constructive, it was not relevant...<br>
> >>=A0>><br>
> >>=A0>>d/<br>
> >>=A0>><br>
> >>=A0>>--<br>
> >>=A0>> =A0Dave Crocker<br>
> >>=A0>> =A0Brandenburg InternetWorking<br>
> >>=A0>> =A0<a href=3D"http://bbiw.net" target=3D"_blank">bbiw.net
> </a><b=
> >>r>
> >><br>
> >></div></div>=A0cheers<br>
> >><span><font color=3D"#888888"><br>
> >>=A0 =A0jon<br>
> >><br>
> >></font></span></blockquote></div><br><br clear=3D"all"><span
> class=3D"HOEnZ=
> >>b"><font color=3D"#888888"><br>-- <br><a href=3D"
> http://www.content-based-s=
> >>cience.org" target=3D"_blank">http://www.content-based-science.org
> </a><br><=
> >>br>
> >></font></span></blockquote></div>
> >></blockquote></div><br><br clear=3D"all"><br>-- <br><a href=3D"
> http://www.c=
> >>ontent-based-science.org" target=3D"_blank">
> http://www.content-based-scienc=
> >>e.org</a><br><br>
> >>
> >>--20cf307f39aa2712b204ca091b8d--
>
> cheers
>
> jon
>
>
--
http://www.content-based-science.org
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://mailman.postel.org/pipermail/end2end-interest/attachments/20120919/ebb0c7e1/attachment-0001.html
More information about the end2end-interest
mailing list