Re: [p2pi] [tana] [tsv-area] TANA proposed charter

Speaking for TANA, I do think it is nicely scoped to a good problem.  I was bringing up some points to consider within the scope of the current charter - or, are you saying that the current charter is only meant to be scoped to file transfer applications?  

Vidya 

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Lars Eggert [mailto:lars.eggert@nokia.com] 
> Sent: Tuesday, October 21, 2008 11:53 AM
> To: Narayanan, Vidya
> Cc: Nicholas Weaver; Stanislav Shalunov; TSV Area; 
> tana@ietf.org; p2pi@ietf.org; Eddy, Wesley M. (GRC-RCN0)[VZ]; 
> Bruce Davie
> Subject: Re: [tana] [p2pi] [tsv-area] TANA proposed charter
> 
> Hi,
> 
> the goal for TANA and ALTO was to identify some subsets of 
> the overall problem space that are sufficiently well 
> understood that we can start to architect solutions. (And 
> limit ourselves to those subsets where the IETF would be an 
> appropriate body for this work.)
> 
> There are certainly other parts of this problem that may be 
> ripe for discussion in the IETF, and chartering TANA and ALTO 
> by no means precludes this discussion from happening. I fully 
> expect the IETF to take on additional work related to this 
> general problem space in the future - we just had to start 
> somewhere, and TANA and ALTO is where we started.
> 
> I'd strongly encourage folks that want to push forward 
> additional proposals for the IETF to take on in this space!
> 
> Lars
> 
> On 2008-10-21, at 14:33, ext Narayanan, Vidya wrote:
> > I'll start by saying that I do like the charter and believe 
> that it is 
> > scoped correctly.
> >
> > I do, however, share some of the concerns that Nicholas has 
> raised.   
> > We are talking about bulk data p2p transfers here, not necessarily 
> > just limited to file transfers.  This does mean p2p models 
> of video, 
> > games that exchange large amounts of data (e.g., World of 
> Warcraft), 
> > large medical data (e.g., high resolution imaging) transfer, etc.
> > fall into this category.  Of course, for some of these 
> applications, 
> > the answer may simply be that TANA is not applicable and 
> hence, should 
> > not be used.  However, I do think there are more grades to this.
> >
> > Another interesting piece of data is that for the first 
> time in many 
> > years, http has overtaken p2p traffic in some markets, primarily 
> > driven by video download applications such as YouTube.  
> Thanks to http 
> > being the common firewall transport mechanism, much of the 
> video now 
> > runs over TCP.  So, is it really as cut and dry as the bulk 
> data P2P 
> > traffic needing to yield to Internet traffic?  As long as 
> it is about 
> > some background file transfer, perhaps that philosophy will 
> just work.  
> > But, if the P2P app is also a video app, the answer is 
> probably more 
> > complex.
> >
> > There is no doubt that this charter is attempting to tackle a very 
> > important issue.  But, it would be good to think about what 
> grades we 
> > may need to address here.
> >
> > Regards,
> > Vidya
> 
> 
_______________________________________________
p2pi mailing list
p2pi@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/p2pi