Re: [nwcrg] nwcrg @ ietf106 minutes

Marie-Jose Montpetit <> Tue, 26 November 2019 07:28 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id 74532120836 for <>; Mon, 25 Nov 2019 23:28:19 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.895
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.895 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_NONE=0.001, UNPARSEABLE_RELAY=0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key)
Received: from ([]) by localhost ( []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id yH3xU3LTzEiR for <>; Mon, 25 Nov 2019 23:28:17 -0800 (PST)
Received: from ( [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::d30]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by (Postfix) with ESMTPS id E3D27120EFC for <>; Mon, 25 Nov 2019 23:28:16 -0800 (PST)
Received: by with SMTP id z26so15872087iot.8 for <>; Mon, 25 Nov 2019 23:28:16 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;; s=20150623; h=from:in-reply-to:references:mime-version:date:message-id:subject:to; bh=9IWd9dJ/TTgDZK4CwJlpzBU/DKahZ2TpR/HmR2J/Tzg=; b=H+KoCCw4z4AyVoFJtYOm5rc/qVqB//DDCYsfM9fmMYcRiMrgH0gXPuthIm4BC+5IiZ 6i878OD2ARMgTx0+CCPlO+iYT7etkXNc7+g282qMGRKQV1fxMpSEOSjMH8AJbd0hRRZO XYNhWnDZ8KZRvOkKTNbPzBrgN/5ffH6Skg+gM5InU7CoWbk29SQq6wmLmLPhOxH3+L3w nT0Vh9/gJ2nECvfTC8G6CmhPx9PyZ+kOYyHEC9QSIBOZSRWCHNJOJ4HBo+9nBd8dr0r1 7t3QYWGa6fapSZKWdZ73JLs20EA1HMiZaUkxDpsUYSXMO1X7OASMkCl1uR4EOVcOfzrz QI3A==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:from:in-reply-to:references:mime-version:date :message-id:subject:to; bh=9IWd9dJ/TTgDZK4CwJlpzBU/DKahZ2TpR/HmR2J/Tzg=; b=gUy4HkUFzNpUZ1BdW1ZFh57YXRCQxCBp27IVy8eamn2y2wwE1ferzby910I9rgiaKS 37P+CiDYIbEvcj4fH9P7cwh4o5D7MmyZ3Ap/JZ/JpOhN8NnY5kHTLmHOOviaonT0MMjR pcWn3T8eoVk5eoGok9cEgsBL3Ebc0R5zKN+us9Og/2ix7MP+Cebvc4kXPY/BVMKrsCXh Yjml7eFr0TugjY9wPeT5bOtqsZqKobduHxmk0tE62Uw8iDthL1Pxq2N8j6OLGPFbxXuk 73kB3xDlgbFszId+ODJhjs36oai78UFohHTh1EqMTczkZvuYVd717uXx/It6bQasPCQa Nu9A==
X-Gm-Message-State: APjAAAVH5iUTkAgEjW0AzCfSAYcAefl2BwWnxp+dyUQJaL/QjfWdmp3j aY7PDI9JjiKTFshziaR5CvU3jBaFUa9k/zUfedBxmQ==
X-Google-Smtp-Source: APXvYqxyWzGxt0+5/E3YlWHxBuwRVgDUSwWXB0ZG07nsBpqIgtAaPZ+VWek3RqcH+reEsnqSH/GmSVzbs+FjgG3GS2s=
X-Received: by 2002:a6b:710f:: with SMTP id q15mr3673609iog.103.1574753296133; Mon, 25 Nov 2019 23:28:16 -0800 (PST)
Received: from 1058052472880 named unknown by with HTTPREST; Mon, 25 Nov 2019 23:28:15 -0800
From: Marie-Jose Montpetit <>
In-Reply-To: <>
References: <> <>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Date: Mon, 25 Nov 2019 23:28:15 -0800
Message-ID: <>
To: Vincent Roca <>, "" <>,
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="000000000000d345bb05983ad210"
Archived-At: <>
Subject: Re: [nwcrg] nwcrg @ ietf106 minutes
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: IRTF Network Coding Research Group discussion list <>
List-Unsubscribe: <>, <>
List-Archive: <>
List-Post: <>
List-Help: <>
List-Subscribe: <>, <>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 26 Nov 2019 07:28:19 -0000

Hi Lloyd, a few things:

Are you recommending adding a glossary to the draft and adding a
clarification of the DVB S2 vs IETF definition of FECFRAME?

As per on-list discussion: you have been the main commenter on this draft
(and thanks for thatt) so maybe you could see if the latest version
responds to your comments and we start from there for a next “last-call”


Marie-José Montpetit, Ph.D.
Research Affiliate, MIT Media Laboratory

On November 26, 2019 at 1:43:02 AM, ( wrote:

> All the comments from Lloyd Wood and Vincent Roca have been answered
> (see details in github I-D repository for Lloyd’s comments).

Well, this is news to me. If something is brought up on the list,
I'd expect it to be answered on the list, as the primary place
where work is discussed. Where is this? Thanks.

> Some satellite vocabulary (satellite "payload" and "FECFRAME"
> in the satellite context) may create confusion at IETF and these
> terms have been removed.

I can see satellite payload/packet vs frame payload causing
confusion if no context is provided, and there is little need
to refer to the satellite platform/payload distinction when everything
is going through the communications payload. However, there is a
glossary in the draft where the term and its use can be explicitly
called out. A glossary is to clear up confusion about vocabulary;
that is why it is there.

FECFRAME is integral to DVB-S and S2, which the draft relies
on heavily. That an IETF group chose the same name, what, a
decade later is merely a coincidence. And there is a glossary
in the draft where the term and its use(s) can be explicitly called

Really, discussing DVB-S without not even saying why you're
not addressing the key FECFRAME component of DVB-S is
insufficient, or not clarifying error correction vs erasure
correction in some detail particularly where terminology (FEC)
overlaps, is not enough in my view.

noted on the draft:

   Physical and link layers coding protection is
   usually sufficient to guarranty Quasi-Error Free, with a negligeable

should be

Physical- and link-layer coding protection are usually
sufficient to guarantee Quasi-Error-Free communications,
with a negligible...

Please run a spellcheck before asking for another
last call.

thanks and regards

Lloyd Wood

On Tuesday, 26 November 2019, 01:08:12 GMT+11, Vincent Roca <> wrote:

Dear all,

We have uploaded the preliminary meeting minutes in the datatracker:
Please tell us if you have comments.

NB: you will also find them in the github repository in IMHO a more
readable format
    along with all the slides presented:

We’d like to warmly thank Nicolas, Cédric and Oumaima for taking notes.


Marie-Jose and Vincent

nwcrg mailing list