Re: [dtn-interest] FW: Results of IETF-conflict review for draft-irtf-dtnrg-tcp-clayer-08

<> Tue, 25 February 2014 09:28 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from localhost ( []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id 494731A0657 for <>; Tue, 25 Feb 2014 01:28:34 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.6
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.6 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, SPF_PASS=-0.001, UNPARSEABLE_RELAY=0.001] autolearn=ham
Received: from ([]) by localhost ( []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id KCLu2ZnEeJbJ for <>; Tue, 25 Feb 2014 01:28:31 -0800 (PST)
Received: from ( []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id 13EF41A0654 for <>; Tue, 25 Feb 2014 01:28:30 -0800 (PST)
Received: from [] by id 4F/5D-31975-D326C035; Tue, 25 Feb 2014 09:28:29 +0000
X-Originating-IP: []
X-StarScan-Version: 6.9.16; banners=-,-,-
X-VirusChecked: Checked
Received: (qmail 15507 invoked from network); 25 Feb 2014 09:28:29 -0000
Received: from (HELO ( by with AES128-SHA encrypted SMTP; 25 Feb 2014 09:28:29 -0000
Received: from ([]) by ([]) with mapi; Tue, 25 Feb 2014 09:28:28 +0000
From: <>
To: <>
Date: Tue, 25 Feb 2014 09:27:00 +0000
Thread-Topic: [dtn-interest] FW: Results of IETF-conflict review for draft-irtf-dtnrg-tcp-clayer-08
Thread-Index: Ac8yBtQWVfXZZ45aT82dyyd7MNB1fAABOiWM
Message-ID: <>
References: <> <>, <>
In-Reply-To: <>
Accept-Language: en-US, en-GB
Content-Language: en-GB
acceptlanguage: en-US, en-GB
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
MIME-Version: 1.0
Subject: Re: [dtn-interest] FW: Results of IETF-conflict review for draft-irtf-dtnrg-tcp-clayer-08
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
List-Id: "The Delay-Tolerant Networking Research Group \(DTNRG\) - Announce." <>
List-Unsubscribe: <>, <>
List-Archive: <>
List-Post: <>
List-Help: <>
List-Subscribe: <>, <>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 25 Feb 2014 09:28:34 -0000


the impression I've gained is that most bundle protocol use is over TCP - that is,
rather than being a compatibility mechanism, TCP is the dominant transport for the
bundle protocol.

Are there any statistics or metrics of use that can shed light here?


Lloyd Wood
From: Vint Cerf []
Sent: 25 February 2014 08:51
To: Wood L  Dr (Electronic Eng)
Cc: dtn-interest
Subject: Re: [dtn-interest] FW: Results of IETF-conflict review for draft-irtf-dtnrg-tcp-clayer-08

This makes it possible to support applications end to end over DTN including the Internet.
It is a compatibility mechanism.


On Tue, Feb 25, 2014 at 3:23 AM, <<>> wrote:
Congratulations to  DTNRG on reaching the below milestone in getting
this draft well on the way to being published.

It's been a long delay since draft-demmer-dtnrg-tcp-clayer-00.txt in October
2006, but defining how the bundle protocol is carried over TCP will go a long
way to improving support for networked communications under the very
difficult disrupted and delay-tolerant network conditions when TCP break...
um. Ah.

Lloyd Wood
From: IETF-Announce [<>] On Behalf Of The IESG [<>]
Sent: 24 February 2014 17:40
To: Lars Eggert;<>;<>
Cc:<>; The IESG;<>
Subject: Results of IETF-conflict review for draft-irtf-dtnrg-tcp-clayer-08

The IESG has completed a review of draft-irtf-dtnrg-tcp-clayer-08
consistent with RFC5742.

The IESG has no problem with the publication of 'Delay Tolerant
Networking TCP Convergence Layer Protocol'
<draft-irtf-dtnrg-tcp-clayer-08.txt> as an Experimental RFC.

The IESG has concluded that there is no conflict between this document
and IETF work.

The IESG would also like the IRTF to review the comments in the
datatracker related to this document and determine whether or not they
merit incorporation into the document. Comments may exist in both the
ballot and the history log.

The IESG review is documented at:

A URL of the reviewed Internet Draft is:

The process for such documents is described in RFC 5743

Thank you,

The IESG Secretary

dtn-interest mailing list<>