Re: [icnrg] Draft proposal for ICN Conceptual Reference Model

[Paulo Mendes <[e-mail]>]

Hi Will

Thank you for your comments and pointers... I would like to start by clarifying that the proposed draft does NOT aim to draft an ICN reference model.. It seems that this was not clear.. It is still too soon to know what it may be... The propose of the draft is to survey what are the common design choice and optative artefacts used by different ICN approaches to tackle different, of the same, applicability picture.

As for IoT, not sure if we should refer to it.. I remind you that there is another draft (draft-pentikousis-icn-scenarios-01) aiming to describe any potential scenario for ICN.. In the draft that I proposed, the applicability pictures that are going to be analyzed are just the one that are tackle by current proposals.

As for the potential deployment of ICN, I do not think that this is the draft to do it.. Actually I think that it is too soon to talk about ICN deployment, since successful cases it will depend on the characteristics of the ICN solution(s) advertised by ICNRG and the type of application area. For instance, for me it is difficult at this point to understand if it is better to deploy ICN over IP or SDN, because I do not know what do you mean by "ICN". For instance if by ICN you mean a framework for general Internet communication (e.g. CCN), maybe IP is fine. if you mean a framework for opportunistic dynamic networks (e.g ICON), maybe SDN is better... I think that deployment study may be a draft by itself to be tackle later on during the current ICN charter..

Cheers
Paulo


On Jan 25, 2013, at 9:02 AM, Will Liu (Shucheng) wrote:

> Hi Paulo,
>  
> I am the co-author of ren-icn-content-retrieval, a survey draft discussing about content retrieval in the ICN. Thank you for your great effort in drafting the conceptual reference model of ICN and my team are very interested in joining your effort and making some contributions to the conceptual reference model.
>  
> The user-cases in 2.3 are very interesting, which inspired us to think that maybe a bigger picture of applying ICN is Internet of Things (IoT). Naming, information publication and searching are  compulsory components in both ICN and IoT. If you think the same way, we would love to explore more and contribute to this section if it has not been taking up by others.
>  
> In section 3, besides the projects listed from section 3.1 to section 3.5, we are capable to add other projects such as MobilityFirst, XIA and CONET.
>  
> Most of the content in our ren-icn-content-retrieval are aligned well with your current layout in Section 4. We are in the middle of revision based on the feedback from peers in the ICNRG and the authors of some projects to make it well-articulated as mentioned by Dirk. If this task is still waiting for claiming, I am wondering if you can assign it to us.
>  
> Besides your current layout, we would like to propose a chapter discussing about the potential deployment of ICN. As we discussed in the mailing list of ICNRG before IETF85, it is a concern to most peers. We have been thinking and comparing the advantages and disadvantages of deploying ICN over IP, integrated with IP, and over SDN.
>  
> Thanks for reading this long email and we do hope that we can join your effort and make some contribution in ICN.
>  
> Cheers,
> Will
>  
> From: [e-mail] [mailto:[e-mail]] On Behalf Of Paulo Mendes
> Sent: Sunday, January 20, 2013 7:52 AM
> To: icnrg
> Subject: [icnrg] Draft proposal for ICN Conceptual Reference Model
>  
> Dear all
>  
> Following the discussion about the three first drafts of the ICNRG, and following Boerje invitation to start the survey document, I just posted in the twiki (ICN Survey Document page) the table of content of a draft aiming to describe a ICN conceptual reference model suitable for ICNRG work. At the bottom of the same page you can first the first draft with the posted table of content and some initial content to justify the table of content.
>  
> As I mentioned before, I don´t think that the draft should be only a survey of ICN solutions. The draft should try to come up with a conceptual reference model based on a clear applicability picture and highlighting the major conceptual building blocks that will then be detailed in the research challenges draft. 
>  
> As I mentioned in a previous email I'll not be able to be in Kista, but I hope you'll find time to discuss this document in the morning of the first day. If the RG chairs think important I can send to the mailing list a brief report about the status of the document some days before the meeting.
>  
> The first milestone is to get a stable table of content and a list of people that will like to contribute to the document, allocating names to sections.
>  
> Cheers
> Paulo
>  
> -------------------------------------------------------------
> Paulo Mendes, Ph.D
> Scientific Director for Innovation of the Research Unit in Informatics Systems and Technologies (SITILabs)
> Director of the Ph.D program on Informatics - New Media and Pervasive Systems (NEMPS)
> Secretary of the ACM SIGCOMM Chapter - Portugal
> Associated Professor at University Lusofona, Portugal
> [e-mail]
> http://siti.ulusofona.pt/~pmendes
> Tel.: [phone]
>  

-------------------------------------------------------------
Paulo Mendes, Ph.D
Scientific Director for Innovation of the Research Unit in Informatics Systems and Technologies (SITILabs)
Director of the Ph.D program on Informatics - New Media and Pervasive Systems (NEMPS)
Secretary of the ACM SIGCOMM Chapter - Portugal
Associated Professor at University Lusofona, Portugal
[e-mail]
http://siti.ulusofona.pt/~pmendes
Tel.: [phone]