IETF Logo Mail Archive

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

Songhaibin <haibin.song@huawei.com> Tue, 18 September 2012 07:09 UTC

Return-Path: <haibin.song@huawei.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 4E5C421E8043 for <decade@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 18 Sep 2012 00:09:02 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -5.762
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-5.762 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.836, BAYES_00=-2.599, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4]
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 wWktE-qjjTG3 for <decade@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 18 Sep 2012 00:09:00 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from lhrrgout.huawei.com (lhrrgout.huawei.com [194.213.3.17]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B2B6311E808D for <DECADE@ietf.org>; Tue, 18 Sep 2012 00:08:59 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from 172.18.7.190 (EHLO lhreml204-edg.china.huawei.com) ([172.18.7.190]) by lhrrg01-dlp.huawei.com (MOS 4.3.5-GA FastPath queued) with ESMTP id AKT70983; Tue, 18 Sep 2012 07:08:58 +0000 (GMT)
Received: from LHREML406-HUB.china.huawei.com (10.201.5.243) by lhreml204-edg.china.huawei.com (172.18.7.223) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 14.1.323.3; Tue, 18 Sep 2012 08:08:33 +0100
Received: from SZXEML404-HUB.china.huawei.com (10.82.67.59) by lhreml406-hub.china.huawei.com (10.201.5.243) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 14.1.323.3; Tue, 18 Sep 2012 08:08:51 +0100
Received: from SZXEML534-MBX.china.huawei.com ([169.254.2.70]) by szxeml404-hub.china.huawei.com ([::1]) with mapi id 14.01.0323.003; Tue, 18 Sep 2012 15:08:43 +0800
From: Songhaibin <haibin.song@huawei.com>
To: Peng Zhang <pzhang.thu@gmail.com>
Thread-Topic: [decade] Open Issue-3 (draft "An HTTP-based DECADE ResourceProtocol")
Thread-Index: AQHNlWQzR+7XvxHv20iTTVNveMuap5ePrAzQ
Date: Tue, 18 Sep 2012 07:08:42 +0000
Message-ID: <E33E01DFD5BEA24B9F3F18671078951F23B324A9@szxeml534-mbx.china.huawei.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>
In-Reply-To: <7B31966F-AA1F-4BBA-9095-0F65053A8F9D@gmail.com>
Accept-Language: en-US, zh-CN
Content-Language: zh-CN
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
x-originating-ip: [10.138.41.123]
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="_000_E33E01DFD5BEA24B9F3F18671078951F23B324A9szxeml534mbxchi_"
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-CFilter-Loop: Reflected
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 07:09:02 -0000

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.

-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

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email