Re: [dtn-interest] FW: Results of IETF-conflict review for draft-irtf-dtnrg-tcp-clayer-08
Arjuna Sathiaseelan <arjuna.sathiaseelan@cl.cam.ac.uk> Tue, 25 February 2014 14:03 UTC
Return-Path: <arjuna.sathiaseelan@gmail.com>
X-Original-To: dtn-interest@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: dtn-interest@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 858621A070C for <dtn-interest@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 25 Feb 2014 06:03:37 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.278
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.278 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, FM_FORGED_GMAIL=0.622, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=no
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 SWKMNbHhHVWB for <dtn-interest@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 25 Feb 2014 06:03:35 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail-pb0-x232.google.com (mail-pb0-x232.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:400e:c01::232]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 12EDB1A0716 for <dtn-interest@irtf.org>; Tue, 25 Feb 2014 06:03:10 -0800 (PST)
Received: by mail-pb0-f50.google.com with SMTP id md12so10629pbc.37 for <dtn-interest@irtf.org>; Tue, 25 Feb 2014 06:03:09 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:sender:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject :from:to:cc:content-type; bh=s2IvK4y3Fz0ZKvlxdSN1X3LwFZbUXZiOxM0jA9Pa6TQ=; b=qlaDeeLpLLj6rZzfLSQgbSPBMO8Rcey16gzd8/fSXwz2Ma2kz96v3slIl1lEGMAl23 Y6LKqFbX3czBYbDWXJfkgaD2AP8F256rVIU7zeXkce/qqekmL/3R4pTfRiMQDzk5nIru RYm1Zav4PjfPNeJmFM00ViUX2S2nwCY9zkQb6EqKB45gwM4quTqnImM3B1t8yFM7fUTX 3V7CoOf0qa5YxcE0+xEPLJ9JyhIMLJkXuWawQlx3l+howu0hC3Hc8kAZ4ip3KatTfbVB bxbrncAqyBcBNqTfZuM2USLPpDh0kFWfZHp5b/hdpHBUOP/aCujSgBmwnupk9UVs71xO vlzg==
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Received: by 10.66.179.143 with SMTP id dg15mr1935671pac.52.1393336989275; Tue, 25 Feb 2014 06:03:09 -0800 (PST)
Sender: arjuna.sathiaseelan@gmail.com
Received: by 10.68.126.129 with HTTP; Tue, 25 Feb 2014 06:03:09 -0800 (PST)
In-Reply-To: <CF32079A.F5A8%william.d.ivancic@nasa.gov>
References: <CAHxHggeQ701aecnu15tcDsMOLboCVFzHaTqendyb2WmrmV+3vg@mail.gmail.com> <CF32079A.F5A8%william.d.ivancic@nasa.gov>
Date: Tue, 25 Feb 2014 14:03:09 +0000
X-Google-Sender-Auth: EZbi4_dWEGtdV15_Hlf8K9oQGKI
Message-ID: <CAPaG1AmHPdRovfjSQpk1DGmnfJT2phq-X0rKdqxzFNGf7LkLSQ@mail.gmail.com>
From: Arjuna Sathiaseelan <arjuna.sathiaseelan@cl.cam.ac.uk>
To: "Ivancic, William D. (GRC-RHN0)" <william.d.ivancic@nasa.gov>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1"
Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/dtn-interest/wWfb3vrznYP5UwIN2oqRqWQvD3g
Cc: dtn-interest <dtn-interest@irtf.org>
Subject: Re: [dtn-interest] FW: Results of IETF-conflict review for draft-irtf-dtnrg-tcp-clayer-08
X-BeenThere: dtn-interest@irtf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
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: Tue, 25 Feb 2014 14:03:37 -0000
One of the things we at Cambridge are working out with Joerg Ott and others are to bring together IP, ICN and DTN together under a single abstraction to support a diverse set of services.. link to our technical report is here if anyone is interested: http://www.cl.cam.ac.uk/techreports/UCAM-CL-TR-841.pdf Arjuna On 25 February 2014 13:55, Ivancic, William D. (GRC-RHN0) <william.d.ivancic@nasa.gov> wrote: > Are there any known "Operational" deployments of DTN? I no NASA is > investigating DTN, be we still do not have what I would call an Operational > deployment. > > Also, LTE is a connected network. How would DTN help here? Dropbox and > email work pretty well in this situation as does text messaging and even > voice conversations (with voice mail when disconnected). > > Note, to the best of my knowledge, there was no high-rate DTN deployed on > the Lunar Laser Communication Demonstration (LLCD). Rather, DTN was sent > over the link from one ground DTN agent to another. I'm not sure at what > rate. > > http://www.nasa.gov/content/disruption-tolerant-networking-experiments-with-optical-communications/#.UwyepiQmXAY > > Will > ****************************** > William D. Ivancic > Phone 216-433-3494 > Fax 216-433-8705 > Networking Lab 216-433-2620 > Mobile 440-503-4892 > http://roland.grc.nasa.gov/~ivancic > > > From: Vint Cerf <vint@google.com> > Date: Tuesday, February 25, 2014 4:43 AM > To: "l.wood@surrey.ac.uk" <l.wood@surrey.ac.uk> > Cc: dtn-interest <dtn-interest@irtf.org> > > Subject: Re: [dtn-interest] FW: Results of IETF-conflict review for > draft-irtf-dtnrg-tcp-clayer-08 > > there is a lot more TCP and IP network readily available than others so, > statistically, this is not a surprise. I anticipate that LTE may prove > another supporting environment. Of course, there continues to be work in > deep space such as the latest laser comm tests to/from the moon at 600 Mb/s. > > vint > > > > On Tue, Feb 25, 2014 at 4:27 AM, <l.wood@surrey.ac.uk> wrote: >> >> Vint, >> >> 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? >> >> thanks >> >> Lloyd Wood >> http://about.me/lloydwood >> ________________________________________ >> From: Vint Cerf [vint@google.com] >> 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 >> >> Lloyd, >> This makes it possible to support applications end to end over DTN >> including the Internet. >> It is a compatibility mechanism. >> >> vint >> >> >> >> On Tue, Feb 25, 2014 at 3:23 AM, >> <l.wood@surrey.ac.uk<mailto:l.wood@surrey.ac.uk>> 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 >> http://about.me/lloydwood >> ________________________________________ >> From: IETF-Announce >> [ietf-announce-bounces@ietf.org<mailto:ietf-announce-bounces@ietf.org>] On >> Behalf Of The IESG [iesg-secretary@ietf.org<mailto:iesg-secretary@ietf.org>] >> Sent: 24 February 2014 17:40 >> To: Lars Eggert; >> draft-irtf-dtnrg-tcp-clayer@tools.ietf.org<mailto:draft-irtf-dtnrg-tcp-clayer@tools.ietf.org>; >> jo@netlab.tkk.fi<mailto:jo@netlab.tkk.fi> >> Cc: iana@iana.org<mailto:iana@iana.org>; The IESG; >> ietf-announce@ietf.org<mailto:ietf-announce@ietf.org> >> 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: >> http://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/conflict-review-irtf-dtnrg-tcp-clayer/ >> >> A URL of the reviewed Internet Draft is: >> http://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-irtf-dtnrg-tcp-clayer/ >> >> The process for such documents is described in RFC 5743 >> >> Thank you, >> >> The IESG Secretary >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> dtn-interest mailing list >> dtn-interest@irtf.org<mailto:dtn-interest@irtf.org> >> https://www.irtf.org/mailman/listinfo/dtn-interest >> > > > _______________________________________________ > dtn-interest mailing list > dtn-interest@irtf.org > https://www.irtf.org/mailman/listinfo/dtn-interest > -- Arjuna Sathiaseelan | http://www.cl.cam.ac.uk/~as2330/
- [dtn-interest] FW: Results of IETF-conflict revie… l.wood
- Re: [dtn-interest] FW: Results of IETF-conflict r… Vint Cerf
- Re: [dtn-interest] FW: Results of IETF-conflict r… l.wood
- Re: [dtn-interest] FW: Results of IETF-conflict r… Vint Cerf
- Re: [dtn-interest] FW: Results of IETF-conflict r… Caini Carlo
- Re: [dtn-interest] FW: Results of IETF-conflict r… l.wood
- Re: [dtn-interest] FW: Results of IETF-conflict r… Ivancic, William D. (GRC-RHN0)
- Re: [dtn-interest] FW: Results of IETF-conflict r… Arjuna Sathiaseelan
- Re: [dtn-interest] FW: Results of IETF-conflict r… Arjuna Sathiaseelan
- Re: [dtn-interest] FW: Results of IETF-conflict r… Ivancic, William D. (GRC-RHN0)
- Re: [dtn-interest] FW: Results of IETF-conflict r… Burleigh, Scott C (312G)