Re: [dtn] proposed DTN workgroup

Thanks Will,

I'm aware of CCSDS/IETF raison d'etre. My thought is: If you guys say it is
good for millions of nodes, then it should be the same for 10s of them. I
just want to cross-check on that.

Thanks for the info :)

J.Fraire

On Thu, Oct 23, 2014 at 11:52 AM, Ivancic, William D. (GRC-LCA0) <
william.d.ivancic@nasa.gov> wrote:

>   Juan,
>
>  Remember,  we are not just discussing space applications. We are
> discussing general applications hundreds of millions of nodes.
> Bundling may work well for your application in space with four or five
> nodes, but perhaps not so much for general Internet.  Remember IETF is
> INTERNET Engineering Task Force.  CCSDS is Space.  If IETF is going to work
> on something, it needs to address the general needs of the Internet user
> base, not just Space.  That is CCSDS' realm.
>
>  Will
>
>
>  A good overview:
> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3zOLrQJ5kbU
>
>  Some papers are here with link to  presentations.
> http://named-data.net/publications/
>
>
>  But above is just one viewpoint of ICN.  ICNRG should lead you to others.
> https://irtf.org/icnrg
>
>
>  A publish/subscribe architecture is what BBN came up with for F6
> (Fractionated Spacecraft)
> http://dl.acm.org/citation.cfm?doid=2348616.2348626
>
>
>  Will
>   ******************************
> William D. Ivancic
> Phone 216-433-3494
> Mobile 440-503-4892
> http://roland.grc.nasa.gov/~ivancic
>
>
>   From: "Juan A. Fraire" <juanfraire@gmail.com>
> Date: Thursday, October 23, 2014 10:10 AM
> To: William Ivancic <ivancic@syzygyengineering.com>
> Cc: "ietf@ietf.org" <ietf@ietf.org>, Kevin Fall <kfall@kfall.net>, Martin
> Stiemerling <mls.ietf@gmail.com>, "iab@iab.org" <iab@iab.org>, "
> iesg@ietf.org" <iesg@ietf.org>, Lloyd Wood <lloyd.wood@yahoo.co.uk>, "
> dtn@ietf.org" <dtn@ietf.org>
> Subject: Re: [dtn] proposed DTN workgroup - what is process being
> followed?
>
>   Hi Will,
>
>  Where can I read (not slides) about how ICN handles routing, forwarding,
> buffering, network-level congestion, and contact predictability? Is there
> an RFC or good article about these?
>
>  Thanks,
>
>
>  J.Fraire
> Universidad Nacional de Córdoba, Argentina
>
>
> On Thu, Oct 23, 2014 at 9:47 AM, William Ivancic <
> ivancic@syzygyengineering.com> wrote:
>
>>  Hi Kevin,
>>
>>  Yes, I worked closely with this group.  Chart 19 says it all. Buy the
>> way, don't confuse the need for DTN with the need for the Bundle protocol.  Chart
>> 19 supports Wes' comments.  There is not way this group can deploy large
>> networks without item 2.
>>
>> Challenging network environment leads to link and network disruptions
>>
>>    1. Need to develop a robust DTN based transport service
>>    2. Requires solutions to addressing, routing, management, discovery
>>    and forwarding/QOS
>>
>>  I have not seen this group actively participating on any of the DTN
>> mail list in the past year or two or perhaps more.  Time flies.
>>
>>  Will
>>
>>
>>   ------------------------------
>> *From:* Kevin Fall <kfall@kfall.net>
>> *To:* William Ivancic <ivancic@syzygyengineering.com>
>> *Cc:* "ietf@ietf.org" <ietf@ietf.org>; Martin Stiemerling <
>> mls.ietf@gmail.com>; "iab@iab.org" <iab@iab.org>; "iesg@ietf.org" <
>> iesg@ietf.org>; Lloyd Wood <lloyd.wood@yahoo.co.uk>; "dtn@ietf.org" <
>> dtn@ietf.org>
>> *Sent:* Wednesday, October 22, 2014 3:27 PM
>> *Subject:* Re: [dtn] proposed DTN workgroup - what is process being
>> followed?
>>
>> Based on a meeting I recently attended and 2014 references such as this:
>>
>> (
>> http://nsrc.cse.psu.edu/talks_2014/thoughts_on_future_army_waveforms_20Mar2014.pdf
>> )
>>
>> I cannot share your conclusion.
>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> dtn mailing list
>> dtn@ietf.org
>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dtn
>>
>>
>

Re: [dtn] proposed DTN workgroup - what is process being followed?