Re: [core] Using CoAP for P2P

Abhijan Bhattacharyya <abhijan.bhattacharyya@gmail.com> Sun, 05 April 2020 12:17 UTC

Return-Path: <abhijan.bhattacharyya@gmail.com>
X-Original-To: core@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: core@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8FE993A040B for <core@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sun, 5 Apr 2020 05:17:06 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.997
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.997 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, HTTPS_HTTP_MISMATCH=0.1, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id dSqpOnfOYM76 for <core@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sun, 5 Apr 2020 05:17:03 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-ed1-x544.google.com (mail-ed1-x544.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4864:20::544]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 33D6C3A0408 for <core@ietf.org>; Sun, 5 Apr 2020 05:17:01 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-ed1-x544.google.com with SMTP id v1so15370099edq.8 for <core@ietf.org>; Sun, 05 Apr 2020 05:17:01 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=1pK7To42QsMQ0NlGkRM5/LtNDtX1wEJSWLTGKk2wH04=; b=D0uctmusqL26+6zjE30bOyFZxfUVzOMw4eHmIwvMs2na4cwtLH5JDMB7FhgAPmHDAH d5NVRH78Ps7FB8n9brCuHp1xELMppH9nuYHgqt5u3erMsBT3Gq/7JUYXzLkQYhFnx2qt ce2r3EENMQW+Uzyu7xyF+Yrth5my4fUAi2GohGPSL8LthDn87KNPuIx01oyTvOmy0jzX DGAdFDxEFu10JX9dl0DcOk9uiMOWq8jZm/IwYRPlV4gdwYpDWFjIXF6l4gIiqRkhF8bR pglyViuvmCWFXe4Z6RDDBC6ydcCVGEEbjRC7JNTN/rqIGHkMlFlYyCwT0P+phvkqbzNt 6X+A==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=1pK7To42QsMQ0NlGkRM5/LtNDtX1wEJSWLTGKk2wH04=; b=GeePohZXz/A4NK0YnLw81ALoRNjzmTJhQRp5yOLarOpyCI5YArLerZYTvEEY7hGD/X RmbNX+kIxclo3ByMnOku2MqT/Vj9B46hP3ID0WETCmdJAvzriITNwnlizGuGx5iegZ6W 2+I2X4Ey3MP9IcsF6ZJycm/yzVjU1zVF1WvKxpoSpHWSpzWwyXYdqBjhpzldcr6U7UO7 yPDy+ytxgHT5Y6YkH9ka9wiR4cX14gaehZA0hdkxR2I2aJXKVi4RMEX5E9KtAwvucpjI DVaT0e9cH+TiiDM40SzrpkUw+MNivy8Y/v4qm7OlsOYhkkLFCmJD+eLtAgWt86EUPGcz wfzQ==
X-Gm-Message-State: AGi0PubuziKL2W1IC4R4kZUDU/98KVcy3OZhBhdfAUQZGbUj+s717w77 RFM4dia0HzVXFhrL+yPTdZxJKvb4OSR2Tq/rK4wEsg==
X-Google-Smtp-Source: APiQypL7lS2I6F6XUNJmuVNmsQnyQaN5T4P0ok92GKauA9Igdju5KZX92bINes1vavWvvABHfc1tBNS4Ckg05fHUwxM=
X-Received: by 2002:a05:6402:b14:: with SMTP id bm20mr14605597edb.365.1586089019548; Sun, 05 Apr 2020 05:16:59 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <CAEW_hyzh3FAvHi1eTkbyGn99o4nFgcH1xP90FdQ6N9sHsAJVYQ@mail.gmail.com> <A8E6E9AA-2E34-439E-8761-53385086CDB9@arm.com> <CAEW_hyy+0fViN8dMWiCi_QHjeD5J4DUAnoRUg5MAKS6fQ3DzcQ@mail.gmail.com> <7B20E77F-CFF4-4735-A0C2-99121CD352D3@ericsson.com> <CAEW_hyzbtq6VbQMq5PhfAQjf6LLz-7t_9He-C_kaU5jztsf20A@mail.gmail.com> <CF1E6A23-243F-47A3-9DFB-BB244E96302B@ericsson.com>
In-Reply-To: <CF1E6A23-243F-47A3-9DFB-BB244E96302B@ericsson.com>
From: Abhijan Bhattacharyya <abhijan.bhattacharyya@gmail.com>
Date: Sun, 5 Apr 2020 17:46:46 +0530
Message-ID: <CAEW_hyzsq8T9uXQYUacZ5VzWf7JsJ1xAzKEMaA-XemOWW06fBQ@mail.gmail.com>
To: Christer Holmberg <christer.holmberg@ericsson.com>
Cc: Thomas Fossati <Thomas.Fossati@arm.com>, core <core@ietf.org>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="00000000000097a8d805a28a20d2"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/core/I6vPEubGEDWrjR-D3Tq2DXvW1GE>
Subject: Re: [core] Using CoAP for P2P
X-BeenThere: core@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: "Constrained RESTful Environments \(CoRE\) Working Group list" <core.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/core>, <mailto:core-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/core/>
List-Post: <mailto:core@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:core-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/core>, <mailto:core-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 05 Apr 2020 12:17:07 -0000

Hi Christer,
Probably what can  be standardized is a method for signalling and
exchanging the ICE candidates so that end nodes can mutually push the data
to the other. Signalling may include resource discovery.

Your proposal looks useful for the purpose. Extending the example towards
two sided exchange might help.

We shall be interested to try it out if there is any open-source
implementation.

Thanks.


On Sat, 4 Apr 2020, 17:56 Christer Holmberg, <christer.holmberg@ericsson.com>
wrote:

> Hi,
>
>
>
> >A bit of more inputs:
>
> >We proposed a delay-sensitive time-series streaming mechanism by
> extending CoAP and presented in last Bangkok IETF. We called it A-REaLiST
> (Adaptive RESTful Real-time Live Streaming for Things).
>
> >The draft is here:
> https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-bhattacharyya-core-a-realist-00
>
> >The relevant research work was published in 2018 Globecom
> workshop: Abhijan Bhattacharyya, Suvrat Agrawal, Hemant Kumar Rath, Arpan
> Pal: "Improving Live-Streaming Experience for Delay-Sensitive IoT
> >Applications: A RESTful Approach" (
> https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/document/8644521).
>
>
>
> What exactly do you want to standardize? As long as one device acts as a
> client, and the other as a server, the current mechanisms should work.
>
>
>
> Now, if you want to send GETs etc in both directions, I assume that each
> endpoints would act as both client and server.
>
>
>
> Regards,
>
>
>
> Christer
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> On Fri, Apr 3, 2020 at 12:11 AM Christer Holmberg <
> christer.holmberg@ericsson.com> wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
>
>
> If you are interested in P2P, you might be interested in the thin-ICE
> presentation that was given at the T2TRG meeting in Singapore:
>
>
>
>
> https://github.com/t2trg/2019-11-singapore/blob/master/slides/44-thin-ICE-151119-Singapore.pdf
> <https://protect2.fireeye.com/v1/url?k=7a432dea-26972098-7a436d71-86859b2931b3-a91f2d2ed99da951&q=1&e=b329b088-d6d0-4446-8ddf-5589a9e3abcd&u=https%3A%2F%2Fgithub.com%2Ft2trg%2F2019-11-singapore%2Fblob%2Fmaster%2Fslides%2F44-thin-ICE-151119-Singapore.pdf>
>
>
>
> Regards,
>
>
>
> Christer
>
>
>
>
>
> *From: *core <core-bounces@ietf.org> on behalf of Abhijan Bhattacharyya <
> abhijan.bhattacharyya@gmail.com>
> *Date: *Thursday, 2 April 2020 at 11.04
> *To: *Thomas Fossati <Thomas.Fossati@arm.com>
> *Cc: *core <core@ietf.org>
> *Subject: *Re: [core] Using CoAP for P2P
>
>
>
> Hi Thomas,
>
> What I am looking at is a situation where I have two nodes each having a
> time-varying resource. Both want to push the states of the respective
> resource to the other node within a common application context. However,
> these exchanges are naturally asynchronous. May be I can think of it more
> like a chat. A typical client-server or observe relationship will not serve
> the purpose. Actually both should have a client and server instance running
> under a common application. Then either each can *observe* the other, or
> can *post* the other. That is how we can do that without a central server.
>
>
>
> If my understanding is right, according to CoAP specification, the nodes
> which can have both server and client (to the origin server) are
> "intermediary" nodes. The only example of "intermediary" considered in the
> spec is the proxy node. But, anyway the situation in this case does not
> concern with intermediary. Both are origin server and end-client together.
>
>
>
> Is there any standardized mechanism to handle this situation?
>
>
>
> Thanks.
>
>
>
> On Wed, Apr 1, 2020 at 5:32 PM Thomas Fossati <Thomas.Fossati@arm.com>
> wrote:
>
> Hi Abhijan,
>
> On 01/04/2020, 12:31, Abhijan Bhattacharyya <
> abhijan.bhattacharyya@gmail.com> wrote:
> > Is there any standardized mechanism to use CoAP for a P2P connection?
>
> Not sure whether RFC 7650 would fit your needs but worth having a
> look -- if you haven't already.
>
> cheers
> --
>
>
>
>
> IMPORTANT NOTICE: The contents of this email and any attachments are
> confidential and may also be privileged. If you are not the intended
> recipient, please notify the sender immediately and do not disclose the
> contents to any other person, use it for any purpose, or store or copy the
> information in any medium. Thank you.
>
>
>
>
> --
>
> Regards,
>
> Abhijan Bhattacharyya,
>
> *Technologist by profession [IoT| Internet Protocols| 5G]*
>
>
>
>
> --
>
> Regards,
>
> Abhijan Bhattacharyya,
>
> *Technologist by profession [IoT| Internet Protocols| 5G]*
>