Re: [ppsp] PPSP WG Update

zhangyunfei <zhangyunfei@chinamobile.com> Mon, 11 June 2012 01:33 UTC

Return-Path: <zhangyunfei@chinamobile.com>
X-Original-To: ppsp@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ppsp@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 356B621F84D6 for <ppsp@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sun, 10 Jun 2012 18:33:34 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -96.023
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-96.023 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_50=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, MIME_BASE64_TEXT=1.753, RELAY_IS_221=2.222, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id fp9lqVFKj4dX for <ppsp@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sun, 10 Jun 2012 18:33:33 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from imss.chinamobile.com (imss.chinamobile.com [221.130.253.135]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id BA07121F84D5 for <ppsp@ietf.org>; Sun, 10 Jun 2012 18:33:32 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from imss.chinamobile.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by localhost.chinamobile.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4731EE40A; Mon, 11 Jun 2012 09:33:30 +0800 (CST)
Received: from mail.chinamobile.com (unknown [10.1.28.22]) by imss.chinamobile.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 39AACE409; Mon, 11 Jun 2012 09:33:29 +0800 (CST)
Received: from zyf-PC ([10.2.43.220]) by mail.chinamobile.com (Lotus Domino Release 6.5.6) with ESMTP id 2012061109332843-1636 ; Mon, 11 Jun 2012 09:33:28 +0800
Date: Mon, 11 Jun 2012 09:33:27 +0800
From: zhangyunfei <zhangyunfei@chinamobile.com>
To: Picconi Fabio <Fabio.Picconi@technicolor.com>, ppsp <ppsp@ietf.org>
References: <C2917A21-A82F-412E-8B34-9B4053504929@cisco.com>, <320C4182454E96478DC039F2C481987204EFAD04EF@MOPESMBX01.eu.thmulti.com>
X-Priority: 3 (Normal)
X-Mailer: Foxmail 7.0.1.85[cn]
Mime-Version: 1.0
Message-ID: <201206110933269837847@chinamobile.com>
X-MIMETrack: Itemize by SMTP Server on jtgsml01/servers/cmcc(Release 6.5.6|March 06, 2007) at 2012-06-11 09:33:28, Serialize by Router on jtgsml01/servers/cmcc(Release 6.5.6|March 06, 2007) at 2012-06-11 09:33:29, Serialize complete at 2012-06-11 09:33:29
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_001_NextPart304285203034_=----"
X-TM-AS-Product-Ver: IMSS-7.0.0.8231-6.8.0.1017-18962.003
X-TM-AS-Result: No--28.238-7.0-31-10
X-imss-scan-details: No--28.238-7.0-31-10;No--28.238-7.0-31-10
X-TM-AS-User-Approved-Sender: No;No
X-TM-AS-User-Blocked-Sender: No;No
Subject: Re: [ppsp] PPSP WG Update
X-BeenThere: ppsp@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
Reply-To: zhangyunfei <zhangyunfei@chinamobile.com>
List-Id: discussing to draw up peer to peer streaming protocol <ppsp.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/ppsp>, <mailto:ppsp-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/ppsp>
List-Post: <mailto:ppsp@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:ppsp-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ppsp>, <mailto:ppsp-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 11 Jun 2012 01:33:34 -0000

Thanks Fabio. That will be good in making the protocol solid. Looking forward to your result. 


BR
Yunfei






zhangyunfei

From: Picconi Fabio
Date: 2012-06-07 21:02
To: ppsp
Subject: Re: [ppsp] PPSP WG Update
I will do some simulations to determine which chunk addressing mechanism performs best in the average case.

Fabio


> -----Original Message-----
> From: ppsp-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:ppsp-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of
> stefano previdi
> Sent: lundi 4 juin 2012 11:39
> To: ppsp; zhangyunfei Zhang
> Subject: [ppsp] PPSP WG Update
> 
> All,
> 
> here are some notes i preparation of the next PPSP meeting we're going
> to have in Vancouver (http://www.ietf.org/meeting/84/index.html)
> 
> 1. Peer Protocol - chunk addressing mechanism
>    We currently have two proposals that I'd try to name as:
> . Bin Notation
> . Ranges
>    Both proposals have been discussed in the mailing list and it
>    looks to me we're NOT achieving agreement/consensus on any of
>    them also due to lack of participation of the WG into the
>    discussion (other than the authors of each proposal).
> 
>    Therefore, as of today, we can reasonably explore the
>    following options:
>    Option-1: We propose both solutions in the peer protocol
>              specification and we define them both MANDATORY so
>              to cope with interoperability issues.
>    Option-2: we select one option through a WG vote (this is my
>              least preferred option).
> 
>    Since I'd really prefer to avoid Option-2, I can only consider
>    the "dual" specification. WG opinion on this is requested.
> 
>    Again, it would be very beneficial to the WG if current
>    implementors of streaming protocols would/could speak-up and
>    give their opinion (see point 4 below).
> 
> 2. Peer Protocol - Security Section
>    The IESG will not accept any protocol specification without a
>    consistent security section (IOW: way more than what we
>    currently have) although there are some arguments on whether
>    we need the security mechanisms in the base spec.
> 
>    Arno and Zong Ning proposed some text and we need to agree/amend
>    it asap so to update the draft. I'd like to close this one and
>    have a new version of the draft for next meeting.
> 
> 3. Tracker Protocol
>    After IETF83 we agreed to split into two distinct drafts: base
>    specification and optional extensions.
> 
>    Authors, it would be good to have a first submission before next
>    meeting.
> 
> 4. Survey draft.
>    We need to refresh/re-submit and the chairs proposed the
>    authors/editors to include a section on deployment experiences
>    and more precisely on chunk addressing and security mechanisms.
>    Hopefully this will also feed ongoing discussions.
> 
> 5. Meeting during IETF84.
>    We have requested a slot for Vancouver meeting. Anyone
>    interested, please request an agenda slot asap to Yunfei or
>    myself.
> 
> Let us know if anything is missing.
> 
> Thanks.
> 
> Stefano & Yunfei
> _______________________________________________
> ppsp mailing list
> ppsp@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ppsp
_______________________________________________
ppsp mailing list
ppsp@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ppsp