Re: [decade] Open Issue-3 (draft "An HTTP-based DECADE ResourceProtocol")

Peng Zhang <pzhang.thu@gmail.com> Tue, 18 September 2012 08:48 UTC

Return-Path: <pzhang.thu@gmail.com>
X-Original-To: decade@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: decade@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B982121F878A for <decade@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 18 Sep 2012 01:48:14 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -3.599
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.001, BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-1]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id FMO8iAw-kRzM for <decade@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 18 Sep 2012 01:48:14 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-pb0-f44.google.com (mail-pb0-f44.google.com [209.85.160.44]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2C23C21F8783 for <DECADE@ietf.org>; Tue, 18 Sep 2012 01:48:14 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by pbbrr4 with SMTP id rr4so10646410pbb.31 for <DECADE@ietf.org>; Tue, 18 Sep 2012 01:48:14 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=subject:mime-version:content-type:from:in-reply-to:date:cc :content-transfer-encoding:message-id:references:to:x-mailer; bh=v8vZBabiNaGl67lKGHZRrvUl9e1vvTV+vrwHd65nq3E=; b=t8jBJPayOicMwGVfoa0MaKBwEyfnW2pttJpTNgla1pwz/cx2J7rcs7e5rtA7xb/44y WD6WDUEFEzb7b6D3n+TkCY68BR/1LzlJpFW1D1SxvYBXQZ/P+dXdkl+NVqlX9PAN0D3X zunSqqrH5rHtHwvaa2tOrEaK9h+BZpVvJju/xXPuLOKFqZXjUnqQqXV7aya0pJzX8JBA z3MTjL6GXuPs3Ka7CHzlYdo2uCGFMKW/4sC9reZAPr5fzSLYS4ujpviiEdHyDrWbZ2TF 6DEVwHLfO5wzuqClaQrser2eLiiCpJwH2sYMAEP2EQsvlILNUN6GRf0PL8nkjO8NV2M/ rgHg==
Received: by 10.68.138.166 with SMTP id qr6mr42582pbb.69.1347958093968; Tue, 18 Sep 2012 01:48:13 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from tu130206.ip.tsinghua.edu.cn (tu130206.ip.tsinghua.edu.cn. [166.111.130.206]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id py9sm8314591pbb.20.2012.09.18.01.48.11 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=OTHER); Tue, 18 Sep 2012 01:48:13 -0700 (PDT)
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v1278)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
From: Peng Zhang <pzhang.thu@gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <505831F8.3010209@cs.tcd.ie>
Date: Tue, 18 Sep 2012 16:48:08 +0800
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-Id: <6EB5BD9B-F14B-4FEB-94DE-B65E9C7DDEA9@gmail.com>
References: <AFD688AF30E249418739DBDC55B9C75B34D7C3B4@SZXEML507-MBS.china.huawei.com> <D60519DB022FFA48974A25955FFEC08C04B130A5@SAM.InterDigital.com> <E33E01DFD5BEA24B9F3F18671078951F23B31EAF@szxeml534-mbx.china.huawei.com> <7B31966F-AA1F-4BBA-9095-0F65053A8F9D@gmail.com> <E33E01DFD5BEA24B9F3F18671078951F23B324A9@szxeml534-mbx.china.huawei.com> <505831F8.3010209@cs.tcd.ie>
To: Stephen Farrell <stephen.farrell@cs.tcd.ie>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1278)
Cc: "DECADE@ietf.org" <DECADE@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [decade] Open Issue-3 (draft "An HTTP-based DECADE ResourceProtocol")
X-BeenThere: decade@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
List-Id: "To start the discussion on DECoupled Application Data Enroute, to discuss the in-network data storage for p2p applications and its access protocol" <decade.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/decade>, <mailto:decade-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/decade>
List-Post: <mailto:decade@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:decade-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/decade>, <mailto:decade-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 18 Sep 2012 08:48:14 -0000

Exactly, the probability would be negligible. Even if we use the trunked hash, say 32 bit, it would suffice too.

BR,

Peng.

On Sep 18, 2012, at 4:34 PM, Stephen Farrell wrote:

> 
> 
> On 09/18/2012 08:08 AM, Songhaibin wrote:
>> Hi Peng,
>> 
>> "Low" does not mean no existence. I'm wondering if two different objects are happened to have the same name at the same DECADE server, or at different DECADE servers with different service providers (we require the name to be global unique), we should have a collision avoidance mechanism for it.
> 
> The existence of SHA256 collisions would be news that would make
> CNN and BBC probably (after they picked it up from /.:-). In
> this case "low" is practically the same as non-existent if you
> use all the bits of SHA256.
> 
> S.
> 
>> -Haibin
>> 
>> 
>> From: Peng Zhang [mailto:pzhang.thu@gmail.com]
>> Sent: Tuesday, September 18, 2012 2:10 PM
>> To: Songhaibin
>> Cc: Rahman, Akbar; Wangdanhua; DECADE@ietf.org
>> Subject: Re: [decade] Open Issue-3 (draft "An HTTP-based DECADE ResourceProtocol")
>> 
>> Hi Haibin,
>> 
>>     I don't quite understand your question. If we are using SHA-256, as suggested in draft-farrell-decade-ni, the probability that two different objects have the same name would be very low.
>> 
>> BR,
>> 
>> Peng.
>> 
>> On Sep 17, 2012, at 5:42 PM, Songhaibin wrote:
>> 
>> 
>> While many people advocate Hashed names, the key point is, shall we allow conflict for the names? If we do not allow, how to solve it.
>> 
>> BR,
>> -Haibin
>> 
>> From: decade-bounces@ietf.org<mailto:decade-bounces@ietf.org> [mailto:decade-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Rahman, Akbar
>> Sent: Wednesday, September 12, 2012 10:31 PM
>> To: Wangdanhua
>> Cc: DECADE@ietf.org<mailto:DECADE@ietf.org>
>> Subject: Re: [decade] Open Issue-3 (draft "An HTTP-based DECADE ResourceProtocol")
>> 
>> Hi Danhua,
>> 
>> Yes, I agree that to make progress on your draft you need to show how to use a naming scheme as part of your proposal.  And I also agree that using the draft-farrell-decade-ni should be the starting point.
>> 
>> 
>> Sincerely,
>> 
>> 
>> Akbar
>> 
>> From: decade-bounces@ietf.org<mailto:decade-bounces@ietf.org> [mailto:decade-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Wangdanhua
>> Sent: Wednesday, September 12, 2012 2:13 AM
>> To: DECADE@ietf.org<mailto:DECADE@ietf.org>
>> Subject: [decade] Open Issue-3 (draft "An HTTP-based DECADE ResourceProtocol")
>> 
>> 
>> Hi all,
>> 
>> The following is the third open issue left for "An HTTP-based DECADE Resource Protocol" (draft-wang-drp). We're looking forward to your opinions and comments.
>> 
>> About the object naming scheme used in DECADE Protocol, we're inclined to adopting the naming scheme proposed in the draft-farrell-decade-ni (Naming Things with Hashes). We thought it's a good scheme and we are planning to have a try and see whether it's workable in the protocol we proposed.
>> 
>> Does anybody have other opinions? And we'd like to hear your voice.
>> 
>> Best wishes,
>> Danhua Wang
>> 
>> 
>>