RE: RE: RE: [P2PSIP] HIP: optional, mandatory?

<marcin.matuszewski@nokia.com> Wed, 23 January 2008 12:30 UTC

Return-path: <p2psip-bounces@ietf.org>
Received: from [127.0.0.1] (helo=stiedprmman1.va.neustar.com) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JHekQ-000185-FC; Wed, 23 Jan 2008 07:30:30 -0500
Received: from [10.90.34.44] (helo=chiedprmail1.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JHekO-00017u-7M for p2psip@ietf.org; Wed, 23 Jan 2008 07:30:28 -0500
Received: from smtp.nokia.com ([192.100.122.230] helo=mgw-mx03.nokia.com) by chiedprmail1.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JHekN-0005Jn-Es for p2psip@ietf.org; Wed, 23 Jan 2008 07:30:28 -0500
Received: from esebh108.NOE.Nokia.com (esebh108.ntc.nokia.com [172.21.143.145]) by mgw-mx03.nokia.com (Switch-3.2.6/Switch-3.2.6) with ESMTP id m0NCThwO004945; Wed, 23 Jan 2008 14:30:17 +0200
Received: from esebh104.NOE.Nokia.com ([172.21.143.34]) by esebh108.NOE.Nokia.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.1830); Wed, 23 Jan 2008 14:29:52 +0200
Received: from esebe102.NOE.Nokia.com ([172.21.138.217]) by esebh104.NOE.Nokia.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.1830); Wed, 23 Jan 2008 14:29:52 +0200
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.5
Content-class: urn:content-classes:message
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Subject: RE: RE: RE: [P2PSIP] HIP: optional, mandatory?
Date: Wed, 23 Jan 2008 14:34:19 +0200
Message-ID: <3F18E76823C95E4795181D74BAC7664F05BE199F@esebe102.NOE.Nokia.com>
In-Reply-To: <d4accb881f22e.4795b446@us.army.mil>
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
Thread-Topic: RE: RE: [P2PSIP] HIP: optional, mandatory?
Thread-Index: AchdAU+oBHXnBCxfT8ClO76zGHZqxQAuTCGQ
References: <476BA8D9.4010203@ericsson.com> <20d2bdfb0712210823m2218c4a6mcace60af3d82db57@mail.gmail.com> <476E2B7C.9070601@ericsson.com> <20d2bdfb0801081416t41b9b84atb3a147659771036@mail.gmail.com> <77F357662F8BFA4CA7074B0410171B6D04049B22@XCH-NW-5V1.nw.nos.boeing.com> <7C5B8529-85C9-4977-8C57-34E9041ED1EC@nomadiclab.com> <77F357662F8BFA4CA7074B0410171B6D04049B33@XCH-NW-5V1.nw.nos.boeing.com> <10DA6CAF-DB5B-4B89-9417-4BEFD816B1E5@cs.columbia.edu> <4571B070-0B2F-4076-AAAB-4398295C9E88@cisco.com> <465FBE4D-F548-4D7C-855C-10498AF22E6C@quinthar.com> <284DBC3B-BF18-400D-8D00-3EB367AEAAA3@cisco.com> <DD40D2FF-809B-4B1F-B43B-0E8F41ED21DB@quinthar.com> <24CCCC428EFEA2469BF046DB3C7A8D223AE531@namail5.corp.adobe.com> <3F18E76823C95E4795181D74BAC7664F05B951F1@esebe102.NOE.Nokia.com> <e3c8ad9a1429b.47946208@us.army.mil> <3F18E76823C95E4795181D74BAC7664F05B95CF4@esebe102.NOE.Nokia.com> <d4accb881f22e.4795b446@us.army.mil>
From: <marcin.matuszewski@nokia.com>
To: <radhika.r.roy@us.army.mil>
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 23 Jan 2008 12:29:52.0328 (UTC) FILETIME=[A711AC80:01C85DBB]
X-Nokia-AV: Clean
X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/)
X-Scan-Signature: b22590c27682ace61775ee7b453b40d3
Cc: p2psip@ietf.org
X-BeenThere: p2psip@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5
Precedence: list
List-Id: Peer-to-Peer SIP working group discussion list <p2psip.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/p2psip>, <mailto:p2psip-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www1.ietf.org/pipermail/p2psip>
List-Post: <mailto:p2psip@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:p2psip-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/p2psip>, <mailto:p2psip-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
Errors-To: p2psip-bounces@ietf.org

Hi Radhika,

We share the same goal. 

Salman, Henning and me are specifying the P2PP protocol
http://tools.ietf.org/wg/p2psip/draft-baset-p2psip-p2pp-01.txt. The
version of the document is going to be updated based on our recent
implementation experience.  

We would appreciate your suggestions and comments. The cooperation on
software development is also appreciated. This will allow P2PSIP WG to
converge much faster.

Marcin


>-----Original Message-----
>From: ext Roy, Radhika R Dr CTR USA USAMC 
>[mailto:radhika.r.roy@us.army.mil] 
>Sent: 22 January, 2008 16:16
>To: Matuszewski Marcin (Nokia-NRC/Helsinki)
>Cc: p2psip@ietf.org; salman@cs.columbia.edu; Matuszewski 
>Marcin (Nokia-NRC/Helsinki)
>Subject: Re: RE: RE: [P2PSIP] HIP: optional, mandatory?
>
>Hi, Mercin:
>
>What we want is to develop the P2PSIP protocol standard for 
>this WG. The P2PSIP protocol drafts are there. You can help to 
>provide insights which proposals are good and if needed what 
>improvements need to be done to finalize the specs or you can 
>proposed a new one or a modified draft combining with the 
>existing ones.
>
>In this way, you can play a role to standardize the P2PSIP 
>protocol for this WG. Then we can proceed to build other P2P 
>things (e.g. HIP-overlay using the standardized P2PSIP 
>protocol of this WG).
>
>Best regards,
>Radhika
>
>----- Original Message -----
>From: marcin.matuszewski@nokia.com
>Date: Tuesday, January 22, 2008 6:02
>Subject: RE: RE: [P2PSIP] HIP: optional, mandatory?
>To: radhika.r.roy@us.army.mil
>Cc: p2psip@ietf.org, salman@cs.columbia.edu, 
>marcin.matuszewski@nokia.com
>
>> 
>> >[RRR] Yes, you are right. So, please help this P2PSIP WG to 
>complete 
>> >the spec for the base P2PSIP protocol based on these implementation 
>> >experiences as soon as possible. We would appreciate this.
>> 
>> We are constantly improving our software implementation and protocol 
>> specification. We published a paper at CCNC conference 
>(Mobile P2PSIP 
>> - Peer-to-Peer SIP communication in mobile communities). It 
>should be 
>> available from ieeexplore.
>> 
>> Do you think that an implementation report (with some measurements) 
>> would be useful?
>> 
>> Marcin
>> 
>> >-----Original Message-----
>> >From: ext Roy, Radhika R Dr CTR USA USAMC 
>> >[mailto:radhika.r.roy@us.army.mil]
>> >Sent: 21 January, 2008 16:13
>> >To: Matuszewski Marcin (Nokia-NRC/Helsinki)
>> >Cc: hsinnrei@adobe.com; dbarrett@quinthar.com; fluffy@cisco.com; 
>> >p2psip@ietf.org
>> >Subject: Re: RE: [P2PSIP] HIP: optional, mandatory?
>> >
>> >Inline [RRR]
>> >
>> >----- Original Message -----
>> >From: marcin.matuszewski@nokia.com
>> >Date: Friday, January 18, 2008 15:30
>> >Subject: RE: [P2PSIP] HIP: optional, mandatory?
>> >To: hsinnrei@adobe.com, dbarrett@quinthar.com, fluffy@cisco.com
>> >Cc: p2psip@ietf.org
>> >
>> >> 
>> >> >Opinion: This call to urgency can be best met IMHO by using
>> P2PP
>> >> >implemented on 600 nodes on Planet Lab since it meets the
>> >criteria of
>> >> >running code, open available free code and large footprint 
>> >> >deployment.
>> >> 
>> >> I fully agree. Besides Nokia's implementation shows that
>> >P2PP can also
>> >> work on mobile devices. Some of you who visited Nokia's P2PSIP
>> demo
>> >> stand in Las Vegas could see a demo of the P2PP implementation
>> on
>> >> Nokiaphones. At the stand we were showing how a mobile phone
>> that
>> >> implementsP2PP can join the Columbia Univ.'s 600 nodes overlay
>> on
>> >> Planet Lab and allow users to use basic SIP services. The demo
>> was
>> >> done in colaborationwith Columbia Univ.
>> >> Everyone who whould like to join the P2PP trial network
>> >please send an
>> >> email to Salman, Henning or me.
>> >> 
>> >> Our goal is to specify a protocol based on our implementation 
>> >> experience. It is very easy to write protocol specifications
>> >that are
>> >> difficult to implement and therefore have high chances to
>> >fail in the
>> >> market, what we could see in the past.
>> >> 
>> >> Marcin
>> >
>> >[RRR] Yes, you are right. So, please help this P2PSIP WG to 
>complete 
>> >the spec for the base P2PSIP protocol based on these implementation 
>> >experiences as soon as possible. We would appreciate this.
>> >
>> 
>

_______________________________________________
P2PSIP mailing list
P2PSIP@ietf.org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/p2psip