On 27 Oct 2015, at 11:18, Lorenzo Colitti <lore...@google.com> wrote: > > Hear, hear! > > We have spent far too much time arguing about this, and I am happy we have a > conclusion. A big thank you to the chairs for calling making this call. I > strongly agree that given the dynamics of the home networking market, there > needs to be one, and only one, routing protocol. I don't see anything else > working in the real world. > > Personally, I happen to think that babel is the best choice, not so much > because of the protocol itself but because of the current availability of > solid, freely-licensed, small-footprint implementations. But IS-IS would have > been fine as well; so would OSPF, if there had been an implementation, and > even HNCP fallback would have fine. At the end of the day it doesn't really > matter which one we choose, as long as we choose one. > > Let's hope that this will stop the arguments and we can all get on with > implementation and deployment.
Indeed, well done to all concerned for reaching consensus on the way forward. It’s been a year since RFC7368 was published, so it’s great to see that we can now progress more specific items as Ray describes. Tim > > On Tue, Oct 27, 2015 at 8:07 PM, Ray Bellis <r...@bellis.me.uk > <mailto:r...@bellis.me.uk>> wrote: > > The Internet Area AD and Routing Area AD engaged with the Homenet WG, in > coordination with the Chair of the Routing Design Team assigned to > Homenet, have concluded the Design Team and issue the following statement: > > --8<--8<-- > > Due to the evolving nature of Homenet a single clear and definitive > recommendation cannot be provided by the Design Team as to which single > routing protocol should be adopted. Several protocols could be shown to > have equal utility in the implementation space. Sadly, it is clear that > broad vendor support is not yet in place, and this introduces a > potential dependency scenario. That is, a broad running code-base might > not exist until a decision is made, and similarly an informed decision > can not be made without the experience from a broad running code-base. > It is the advice of the Design Team that Homenet encourage experimental > trials, and therefore output experimental documents, of the routing > options and results and review these and any temporary routing protocol > selection at the appropriate time in the future when sufficient > deployment experience exists. > > Collectively we would like to express our sincere thanks the Design Team > participants for their efforts on a challenging topic. > > Russ White, DT Chair > Alia Atlas, RTG Area AD > Terry Manderson, INT Area AD > > --8<--8<-- > > Notwithstanding the valiant efforts of the Design Team, the Chairs > believe that there is WG consensus that a single “mandatory to > implement” routing protocol must be chosen. We also believe that further > delaying the direction here has long passed the point of diminishing > returns. > > Based on the feedback received in Prague and on the WG mailing list > thereafter, we are therefore declaring rough consensus that Babel[*] > shall be the “mandatory to implement” routing protocol for Homenet > routers, albeit only on an Experimental basis at this time. > > The aim in making this decision is to allow the non-routing-protocol > aspects of Homenet to move forward in the near term, while allowing time > for additional implementation, experimentation and specification. To > that end, we solicit Experimental Internet Drafts to document > Homenet-specific profiles of any applicable routing solution and to > report results of any relevant experimentation and implementation. > > We expect that this decision will be revisited in a future Standards > Track document based on specifications and running code available at > that time. > > - Ray, Mark and Terry > > * Vendors looking to ship Homenet routers in the near term should refer > to RFC 6126, RFC 7557, draft-boutier-babel-source-specific, and > available open source implementations thereof for the routing protocol > portion of the Homenet solution space. > > > > _______________________________________________ > homenet mailing list > homenet@ietf.org <mailto:homenet@ietf.org> > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/homenet > <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/homenet> > > _______________________________________________ > homenet mailing list > homenet@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/homenet
_______________________________________________ homenet mailing list homenet@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/homenet
