Re: [icnrg] draft-irtf-icnrg-icnlowpan-08.txt

Martine Sophie Lenders <m.lenders@fu-berlin.de> Tue, 08 September 2020 10:38 UTC

Return-Path: <mlenders@zedat.fu-berlin.de>
X-Original-To: icnrg@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: icnrg@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4FF3D3A0C06 for <icnrg@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 8 Sep 2020 03:38:51 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.844
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.844 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, NICE_REPLY_A=-0.948, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3=0.001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=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 L5locHrn8mlP for <icnrg@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 8 Sep 2020 03:38:49 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from outpost1.zedat.fu-berlin.de (outpost1.zedat.fu-berlin.de [130.133.4.66]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id B59143A0BAA for <icnrg@irtf.org>; Tue, 8 Sep 2020 03:38:49 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from inpost2.zedat.fu-berlin.de ([130.133.4.69]) by outpost.zedat.fu-berlin.de (Exim 4.93) for icnrg@irtf.org with esmtps (TLS1.2) tls TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (envelope-from <mlenders@zedat.fu-berlin.de>) id 1kFb1T-000AsM-M1; Tue, 08 Sep 2020 12:38:47 +0200
Received: from [207.89.91.156] (helo=[192.168.101.10]) by inpost2.zedat.fu-berlin.de (Exim 4.93) for icnrg@irtf.org with esmtpsa (TLS1.2) tls TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 (envelope-from <m.lenders@fu-berlin.de>) id 1kFb1T-0015Vn-AZ; Tue, 08 Sep 2020 12:38:47 +0200
To: icnrg@irtf.org
References: <158832868689.11087.7358311653842055205@ietfa.amsl.com> <E1954083-8BA4-4173-A87E-EA87D5771C9F@tzi.org> <9900E3D1-11E4-461C-9B91-754E87527E6A@tzi.org> <3e7a2a25-3c34-33a4-5acd-98752e031d0f@fu-berlin.de>
From: Martine Sophie Lenders <m.lenders@fu-berlin.de>
Message-ID: <32b9ff99-2966-589c-11c6-309757d386df@fu-berlin.de>
Date: Tue, 8 Sep 2020 12:38:46 +0200
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:68.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/68.12.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <3e7a2a25-3c34-33a4-5acd-98752e031d0f@fu-berlin.de>
Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha256; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="DuS6PMAjVDfAukL7xbGNa5unMbhbKzoNU"
X-Original-Sender: m.lenders@fu-berlin.de
X-Originating-IP: 207.89.91.156
X-ZEDAT-Hint: A
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/icnrg/ZJEVtyvPdhGpTLZh5inM4Rb08CA>
Subject: Re: [icnrg] draft-irtf-icnrg-icnlowpan-08.txt
X-BeenThere: icnrg@irtf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: Information-Centric Networking research group discussion list <icnrg.irtf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.irtf.org/mailman/options/icnrg>, <mailto:icnrg-request@irtf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/icnrg/>
List-Post: <mailto:icnrg@irtf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:icnrg-request@irtf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.irtf.org/mailman/listinfo/icnrg>, <mailto:icnrg-request@irtf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 08 Sep 2020 10:38:51 -0000

Hi,

for those interested, the paper can no be found at
https://ilab-pub.imp.fu-berlin.de/papers/lgsw-cdsfr-20.pdf

Best regards,
Martine

Am 26.08.20 um 09:36 schrieb Martine Sophie Lenders:
> Hello Carsten,
>
> Am 26.08.20 um 00:26 schrieb Carsten Bormann:
>> [...]
>>
>> The discussion in Section 4.2 (as well as the Security Considerations for that) might benefit from a reference to
>> draft-ietf-6lo-minimal-fragment, in RFC editor queue.
>> Does icnlowpan have any opinion on fragment forwarding?
> We (Cenk, Matthias, Thomas, and I) just got a short paper accepted at
> ACM ICN 2020, that visits ICNLoWPAN in combination with
> draft-ietf-6lo-fragment-recovery. Many of the findings there, are also
> applicable for draft-ietf-6lo-minimal-fragment.
>
> The paper will be publicly accessible soon, but to give a short preview:
> The problem with fragment forwarding is that it effectively bypasses
> en-route caching, as the fragmented data chunks are never presented to
> the ICN layer. In our short paper we present a simple cross-layer
> extension to 6LoWPAN Selective Fragment Recovery that allows to have
> both fragment forwarding and en-route caching.
>
>> [...]
> Best regards,
> Martine
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> icnrg mailing list
> icnrg@irtf.org
> https://www.irtf.org/mailman/listinfo/icnrg