Re: What is the long term plan for Internet evolution?

Behcet Sarikaya <sarikaya2012@gmail.com> Wed, 30 June 2021 16:38 UTC

MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <CAMm+LwiFajxuV3E_u7b-f=7DqTHXG_4Y=VLoCsUxknD_mCp1=Q@mail.gmail.com> <00722e06-a385-251c-d95d-2ff67e83f5c1@foobar.org> <CAMm+LwgwwX4zhqqH27FtBEyKRn74BdunswpembR_O6R34vTuSA@mail.gmail.com> <16008.1625010713@localhost> <0100017a5a6c13e7-53cfcee8-b8dd-45b1-9a26-f30f497db3a9-000000@email.amazonses.com> <CAMm+Lwi25EhWGo-ZdcW+B2wF9fSD94+qMQXi8aUuGYJWfT7ueg@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CAMm+Lwi25EhWGo-ZdcW+B2wF9fSD94+qMQXi8aUuGYJWfT7ueg@mail.gmail.com>
Reply-To: sarikaya@ieee.org
From: Behcet Sarikaya <sarikaya2012@gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 30 Jun 2021 11:38:08 -0500
Message-ID: <CAC8QAccqJShVD6eWe7JLXRfzwszaYUMOH8KeJo0nStvCafzoww@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: What is the long term plan for Internet evolution?
To: Phillip Hallam-Baker <phill@hallambaker.com>
Cc: IETF Discussion Mailing List <ietf@ietf.org>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="0000000000009c59a605c5fe59d6"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ietf/gGHO-JearkJw43JTwe704zHuzv8>
Precedence: list

Thank you Philip for starting this discussion.
I think we should definitely discuss this.

The issue I wish to add is the upcoming LEO satellite networks like Star
Link, OneWeb, and others.

Behcet

On Tue, Jun 29, 2021 at 9:14 PM Phillip Hallam-Baker <phill@hallambaker.com>
wrote:

> And I am sure this has been re-invented multiple times over.
>
> On Tue, Jun 29, 2021 at 8:57 PM Kent Watsen <kent@watsen.net> wrote:
>
>> NETCONF Subscribed Notifications (RFC 8639) over HTTP/2 also does this.
>>
>> K.
>>
>>
>> > On Jun 29, 2021, at 7:51 PM, Michael Richardson <mcr+ietf@sandelman.ca>
>> wrote:
>> >
>> >
>> > Phillip Hallam-Baker <phill@hallambaker.com> wrote:
>> >> That is what a transaction is, right. Nope. Many of my transactions
>> have
>> >> people in the middle of them making decisions or big compute loads. So
>> in
>> >> the HTTP world we end up with
>> >
>> >> < C:Request, S:Ack, [C:Poll, S:Pending,] * C:Poll, S: Response>
>> >
>> >> That is plain ugly. The pattern I really want is:
>> >
>> >> < C:Request, S:Ack, S: Response>
>> >
>> >> There is no need to poll, just respond when finished. That might be
>> >> seconds, minutes, days or even years.
>> >
>> > CoAP supports this.
>> >
>> >> For telemetry, the pattern I want is
>> >
>> >> < C:Config, S:Data, S:Data, S:Data, S:Data, S:Data, C:Config, S:Data,
>> >> S:Data, ...>
>> >
>> >> Again, this just doesn't fit onto the TCP or HTTP communication
>> patterns
>> >> and it is not really something QUIC is designed for. Sure we could
>> make do.
>> >> But I choose not to.
>> >
>> > CoAP Observe does this.
>> > CoAP works better without NAT because the NAT closes the subsequent
>> S:Data in
>> > many cases.
>> >
>> > --
>> > Michael Richardson <mcr+IETF@sandelman.ca>   . o O ( IPv6 IøT
>> consulting )
>> >           Sandelman Software Works Inc, Ottawa and Worldwide
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>>
>>

What is the long term plan for Internet evolution? Phillip Hallam-Baker
Re: What is the long term plan for Internet evolu… Nick Hilliard
Re: What is the long term plan for Internet evolu… Phillip Hallam-Baker
Re: What is the long term plan for Internet evolu… Brian E Carpenter
RE: What is the long term plan for Internet evolu… Larry Masinter
Re: What is the long term plan for Internet evolu… Benjamin Kaduk
Re: What is the long term plan for Internet evolu… Michael Richardson
Re: What is the long term plan for Internet evolu… Kent Watsen
Re: What is the long term plan for Internet evolu… Phillip Hallam-Baker
Re: What is the long term plan for Internet evolu… Brian E Carpenter
Re: What is the long term plan for Internet evolu… Behcet Sarikaya