IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [earlywarning] What problem is ATOCA trying to address?

"DALY, BRIAN K (ATTCINW)" <BD2985@att.com> Fri, 26 March 2010 19:55 UTC

Return-Path: <BD2985@att.com>
X-Original-To: earlywarning@core3.amsl.com
Delivered-To: earlywarning@core3.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B3B163A6C28 for <earlywarning@core3.amsl.com>; Fri, 26 Mar 2010 12:55:57 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -105.312
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-105.312 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.157, BAYES_00=-2.599, DNS_FROM_OPENWHOIS=1.13, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id V5rdcgYgw368 for <earlywarning@core3.amsl.com>; Fri, 26 Mar 2010 12:55:56 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail120.messagelabs.com (mail120.messagelabs.com [216.82.250.83]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C1AC03A6C18 for <earlywarning@ietf.org>; Fri, 26 Mar 2010 12:55:56 -0700 (PDT)
X-VirusChecked: Checked
X-Env-Sender: BD2985@att.com
X-Msg-Ref: server-14.tower-120.messagelabs.com!1269633379!42235374!1
X-StarScan-Version: 6.2.4; banners=-,-,-
X-Originating-IP: [144.160.112.25]
Received: (qmail 17992 invoked from network); 26 Mar 2010 19:56:19 -0000
Received: from sbcsmtp3.sbc.com (HELO tlph064.enaf.dadc.sbc.com) (144.160.112.25) by server-14.tower-120.messagelabs.com with DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA encrypted SMTP; 26 Mar 2010 19:56:19 -0000
Received: from enaf.dadc.sbc.com (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by tlph064.enaf.dadc.sbc.com (8.14.3/8.14.3) with ESMTP id o2QJuIBK027356; Fri, 26 Mar 2010 14:56:19 -0500
Received: from td03xsmtp007.US.Cingular.Net (intexchapp01.us.cingular.net [135.179.64.45] (may be forged)) by tlph064.enaf.dadc.sbc.com (8.14.3/8.14.3) with ESMTP id o2QJuBkr027177; Fri, 26 Mar 2010 14:56:11 -0500
Received: from bd01xsmtp004.US.Cingular.Net ([135.163.18.45]) by td03xsmtp007.US.Cingular.Net with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.3959); Fri, 26 Mar 2010 14:56:11 -0500
Received: from BD01MSXMB016.US.Cingular.Net ([135.214.27.50]) by bd01xsmtp004.US.Cingular.Net with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.3959); Fri, 26 Mar 2010 12:56:09 -0700
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.5
Content-class: urn:content-classes:message
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Date: Fri, 26 Mar 2010 12:56:08 -0700
Message-ID: <FDFC6E6B2064844FBEB9045DF1E3FBBC3A8887@BD01MSXMB016.US.Cingular.Net>
In-Reply-To: <424647DE-DA3B-4141-A1A1-060B7F7195E5@incident.com>
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
Thread-Topic: [earlywarning] What problem is ATOCA trying to address?
thread-index: AcrNAw+iIalidtMGTNWi12Ra7jNgeAAGyhJA
References: <C7D24EAC.2B5BC%br@brianrosen.net><8136DC6D-FD55-4A9F-A81B-902584B3DF6D@cs.columbia.edu> <424647DE-DA3B-4141-A1A1-060B7F7195E5@incident.com>
From: "DALY, BRIAN K (ATTCINW)" <BD2985@att.com>
To: Art Botterell <acb@incident.com>, earlywarning@ietf.org
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 26 Mar 2010 19:56:09.0363 (UTC) FILETIME=[6100B630:01CACD1E]
Subject: Re: [earlywarning] What problem is ATOCA trying to address?
X-BeenThere: earlywarning@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
List-Id: "Discussion list for Authority-to-Individuals \(Early Warning\) Emergency " <earlywarning.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/earlywarning>, <mailto:earlywarning-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/earlywarning>
List-Post: <mailto:earlywarning@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:earlywarning-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/earlywarning>, <mailto:earlywarning-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 26 Mar 2010 19:55:57 -0000

Agree Art - Twitter is like SMS - no guarantee, unreliable, and prone to
congestion. While in general it is good to try to get the message out as
many ways as possible, at least one should be deemed "reliable".

Brian

-----Original Message-----
From: earlywarning-bounces@ietf.org
[mailto:earlywarning-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Art Botterell
Sent: Friday, March 26, 2010 9:37 AM
To: earlywarning@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [earlywarning] What problem is ATOCA trying to address?

On Mar 26, 2010, at 3/26/10 9:14 AM, Henning Schulzrinne wrote:
> And to bore everyone again with the same thing: In many cases,
notifications are routinely sent to people outside a specific area or
beyond a single network.

Which is why I thought it might be useful to reflect on WHY, after all
these years, IP multicast has such limited scope, and on whether similar
constraints might apply here.

Meanwhile, unicast approaches like Twitter rarely try to reach everyone
on a particular local network, and they don't have any strict
constraints on latency or even reliability, so I'd be cautious about
assuming their suitability in emulation of a multicasting function.
Anyone who's ever tried to text on New Year's Eve or Mother's Day should
be able to relate.

- Art
_______________________________________________
earlywarning mailing list
earlywarning@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/earlywarning

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email