Re: [dtn-interest] RFC 5050 revision?

Stephen Farrell <stephen.farrell@cs.tcd.ie> Wed, 30 May 2012 22:24 UTC

Return-Path: <stephen.farrell@cs.tcd.ie>
X-Original-To: dtn-interest@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: dtn-interest@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E950811E80A2 for <dtn-interest@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 30 May 2012 15:24:03 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -102.542
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-102.542 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.057, BAYES_00=-2.599, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id J7Z8Ry5KzI4c for <dtn-interest@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 30 May 2012 15:24:01 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from scss.tcd.ie (hermes.scss.tcd.ie [IPv6:2001:770:10:200:889f:cdff:fe8d:ccd2]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C01B411E8073 for <dtn-interest@irtf.org>; Wed, 30 May 2012 15:24:00 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by hermes.scss.tcd.ie (Postfix) with ESMTP id 193FD153959; Wed, 30 May 2012 23:23:58 +0100 (IST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=cs.tcd.ie; h= content-transfer-encoding:content-type:in-reply-to:references :subject:mime-version:user-agent:from:date:message-id:received :received:x-virus-scanned; s=cs; t=1338416637; bh=pNDL5pq/abyl5L ufHad6sfbW8IkqnanQDVI7Eg2Euok=; b=lFrL34dtjHNGX8YcTZjBnSdKb49pyp V38sR3CXuvO/e/TwFj7pj7ocoV9oTmHxgpWiA6Jsh35eU/CjORmWYEoobiieuXCc GYM0hUWma9Hv1gmAC6yF815HxfPks78uFo0CGxgEkHbS+0pEFaM2g/LcaojJulSD O6FHqPF24rDxNx9oNqo/L1HhHczocbLYcjnihPJ9eBQpj7EoU1BIOjROKlz8rP6T KNWuNGpoamMcJZ0ouvIVufyzj8gnoK8wuLLCLHGLZcB3RJzFHDolrldNQVo0oEyc uCeBwCRhJZ36jfs9bcWw46MRZAEac/8DNsx2h9kTSzQGk/ZOPiMowW7w==
X-Virus-Scanned: Debian amavisd-new at scss.tcd.ie
Received: from scss.tcd.ie ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (scss.tcd.ie [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10027) with ESMTP id CyHAd0cV75Gx; Wed, 30 May 2012 23:23:57 +0100 (IST)
Received: from [10.87.48.8] (unknown [86.42.25.154]) by smtp.scss.tcd.ie (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id C9940153B1E; Wed, 30 May 2012 23:23:54 +0100 (IST)
Message-ID: <4FC69DFA.60003@cs.tcd.ie>
Date: Wed, 30 May 2012 23:23:54 +0100
From: Stephen Farrell <stephen.farrell@cs.tcd.ie>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:12.0) Gecko/20120430 Thunderbird/12.0.1
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: "Ivancic, William D. (GRC-RHN0)" <william.d.ivancic@nasa.gov>
References: <4FB2B614.1090303@cs.tcd.ie> <FD7B10366AE3794AB1EC5DE97A93A37341C5B16AE7@EXMB01CMS.surrey.ac.uk> <4FB8CBB2.1000304@cs.tcd.ie> <F05DB43E-FA82-4087-B038-0F0917FFCF30@nasa.gov>
In-Reply-To: <F05DB43E-FA82-4087-B038-0F0917FFCF30@nasa.gov>
X-Enigmail-Version: 1.4.1
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="windows-1252"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Cc: "dtn-interest@irtf.org" <dtn-interest@irtf.org>
Subject: Re: [dtn-interest] RFC 5050 revision?
X-BeenThere: dtn-interest@irtf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
List-Id: "The Delay-Tolerant Networking Research Group \(DTNRG\) - Announce." <dtn-interest.irtf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.irtf.org/mailman/options/dtn-interest>, <mailto:dtn-interest-request@irtf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.irtf.org/mail-archive/web/dtn-interest>
List-Post: <mailto:dtn-interest@irtf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:dtn-interest-request@irtf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.irtf.org/mailman/listinfo/dtn-interest>, <mailto:dtn-interest-request@irtf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 30 May 2012 22:24:04 -0000

Hi Will,

On 05/30/2012 08:04 PM, Ivancic, William D. (GRC-RHN0) wrote:
> 
> On May 20, 2012, at 6:47 AM, Stephen Farrell wrote:
> 
>>
>>
>> On 05/20/2012 09:30 AM, L.Wood@surrey.ac.uk wrote:
>>> Stephen Farrell wrote:
>>>> In addition, we'd be interested in hearing whether
>>>> folks would like to explore doing DTN based not on
>>>> a straight revision of the BP, but maybe e.g. based
>>>> on CoAP, SPDY, websockets, or other protocols.
>>>
>>> Since this group was set up to push and develop only the bundle protocol, the group will probably need to be rechartered to allow this. Non-bundle protocol work has been ignored previously.
>>
>> I don't think rechartering is a must-do, but I do agree that
>> if enough people want to do credible DTN work not associated
>> with the BP then we probably should update the charter text
>> so the very few people who read the charter [1] don't get
>> confused.
> 
> I think a recharter is necessary to encourage additional thinking in store-carry-and-forward techniques.  The first two paragraphs are more open thinking, but the following two propose a specific solution and appears rather restrictive.

IRTF RG charters aren't meant to be restrictive like that.

I'd rather discuss what people want to do and then decide
if we want new charter text. (Note: want, not need:-)

S

> http://irtf.org/dtnrg
> "The group intends to build upon the extended “bundling” architecture created originally for the Interplanetary Internet. This architecture proposes an alternative to the Internet TCP/IP end-to-end model and employs hop-by-hop storage and retransmission as a transport-layer overlay. It provides a messaging service interface conceptually similar to electronic mail, but generalized for application-independence and supported by specialized reliability and routing capabilities.
> 
> The intended work products of the DTNRG include architectural descriptions (concept documents) a bundling protocol specification, and a series of one or more network-environment-specific “profile” documents. These profile documents will include descriptions of ‘convergence layers’ intended to adapt the overlying messaging architecture for use in specialized networking environments (space, water, sensor networks), and are expected to be created by the study teams described in the Membership section below. One study team output will be an “Internet profile” document, developed in concert with the architectural and protocol specification documents, giving suggested naming conventions and protocols to use for transport within the public Internet."
> 
> - Will