Re: [Manet-dt] Re: PacketBB
Thomas Clausen <T.Clausen@computer.org> Wed, 28 March 2007 18:47 UTC
Return-path: <manet-dt-bounces@ietf.org>
Received: from [127.0.0.1] (helo=stiedprmman1.va.neustar.com) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1HWdBc-0004N0-4p; Wed, 28 Mar 2007 14:47:56 -0400
Received: from [10.91.34.44] (helo=ietf-mx.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1HWdBa-0004Lm-8B; Wed, 28 Mar 2007 14:47:54 -0400
Received: from outbound.mailhop.org ([63.208.196.171]) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1HWdBY-0004R6-W0; Wed, 28 Mar 2007 14:47:54 -0400
Received: from did75-10-82-236-230-133.fbx.proxad.net ([82.236.230.133] helo=[192.168.147.109]) by outbound.mailhop.org with esmtpsa (TLSv1:AES128-SHA:128) (Exim 4.63) (envelope-from <T.Clausen@computer.org>) id 1HWdBX-0004Kg-O1; Wed, 28 Mar 2007 14:47:51 -0400
X-Mail-Handler: MailHop Outbound by DynDNS
X-Originating-IP: 82.236.230.133
X-Report-Abuse-To: abuse@dyndns.com (see http://www.mailhop.org/outbound/abuse.html for abuse reporting information)
X-MHO-User: voop
In-Reply-To: <39C363776A4E8C4A94691D2BD9D1C9A101774841@XCH-NW-7V2.nw.nos.boeing.com>
References: <019c01c76d85$0e6904f0$165cfa84@SEXTANT><4607DBF4.8060608@nokia.com><963155AB-4ECA-4082-96CE-1A003636C9E3@gmail.com> <460A8AA7.8090006@nokia.com> <39C363776A4E8C4A94691D2BD9D1C9A101774841@XCH-NW-7V2.nw.nos.boeing.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v752.3)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"; delsp="yes"; format="flowed"
Message-Id: <65D62FA8-4AC9-49BB-9D05-00E8298BA1E0@computer.org>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
From: Thomas Clausen <T.Clausen@computer.org>
Subject: Re: [Manet-dt] Re: PacketBB
Date: Wed, 28 Mar 2007 20:48:12 +0200
To: "Templin, Fred L" <Fred.L.Templin@boeing.com>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.752.3)
X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/)
X-Scan-Signature: 8b431ad66d60be2d47c7bfeb879db82c
Cc: manet <manet@ietf.org>, manet-dt@ietf.org
X-BeenThere: manet-dt@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5
Precedence: list
List-Id: MANET Design Team <manet-dt.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/manet-dt>, <mailto:manet-dt-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www1.ietf.org/pipermail/manet-dt>
List-Post: <mailto:manet-dt@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:manet-dt-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/manet-dt>, <mailto:manet-dt-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
Errors-To: manet-dt-bounces@ietf.org
On Mar 28, 2007, at 5:45 PM, Templin, Fred L wrote: >> My goal would be to save some substantial packet size in the average >> case. > > But can you do this without loss of generality? > > FWIW, I advocated a TLV approach for packet encoding a > long time ago but was beaten back by forces that preferred > efficiency above all. If you're not careful, what you end > up with is a proprietary solution and/or limited domain of > applicability. I concur with what Fred Templin states above. OSPF went down the same route with their LLS... A lot of efforts were spent on the design of packetbb - in particular, in achieving a general format offering extensibility, parse-ability and compactness -- the latter through compressable/ aggregateable addresses and modular message/packet/tlv headers. And, I may add, in an open process where all input that was brought forward was carefully reflected on and taken into account as best possible. Chris has already cited examples hereof, so I won't do that unless prodded to do so. I'll not reiterate Chris' email, but I agree with the general comments he make, that there're requirements pulling in opposite directions for the design of packetbb. My point of view is, that packetbb offers a good compromise between these requirements. I can only speak for OLSR, however message sizes are in the "average case" for OLSRv2 expected (and observed) to be less than for OLSRv1 -- with the added benefit of a more flexible/extensible format to boost. I'd really not like to revert to a proprietary packet/message format, which will leave us with no extensibility and complicated parsing logic. I'd also rather not have to spend another 2+ years in development of an alternative format, when one exists which I find to be a good compromise. Thomas -- Thomas Clausen Thomas.Clausen@polytechnique.fr http://www.lix.polytechnique.fr/Labo/Thomas.Clausen/ http://www.lix.polytechnique.fr/hipercom/ _______________________________________________ Manet-dt mailing list Manet-dt@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/manet-dt
- [Manet-dt] Review Request Joe Macker
- Re: [Manet-dt] Review Request Charles E. Perkins
- RE: [Manet-dt] Review Request Joe Macker
- [Manet-dt] Re: PacketBB Ian Chakeres
- [Manet-dt] Re: [manet] Re: PacketBB Ian Chakeres
- [Manet-dt] Re: PacketBB Charles E. Perkins
- RE: [Manet-dt] Re: PacketBB Templin, Fred L
- Re: [Manet-dt] Re: PacketBB Charles E. Perkins
- RE: [Manet-dt] Re: PacketBB Templin, Fred L
- Re: [Manet-dt] Re: PacketBB Thomas Clausen
- Re: [manet] Re: [Manet-dt] Review Request SATOH, Hiroki (HitachiSDL)
- RE: [manet] Re: [Manet-dt] Review Request Joe Macker
- Re: [manet] Re: [Manet-dt] Review Request Charles E. Perkins
- RE: [manet] Re: [Manet-dt] Review Request Joe Macker
- Re: [manet] Re: [Manet-dt] Review Request SATOH, Hiroki (HitachiSDL)
- RE: [manet] Re: [Manet-dt] Review Request Dearlove, Christopher (UK)
- RE: [manet] Re: [Manet-dt] Review Request Templin, Fred L
- Re: [Manet-dt] Review Request Philippe Jacquet
- RE: [manet] Re: [Manet-dt] Review Request Justin Dean
- Re: [manet] Re: [Manet-dt] Review Request Philippe Jacquet
- Re: [manet] Re: [Manet-dt] Review Request Brian Adamson
- [Manet-dt] DYMO RREQ flooding and super-flooding Philippe Jacquet