IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [ppsp] PPSP Re-charter discussion

Wesley Eddy <wes@mti-systems.com> Wed, 22 February 2012 15:44 UTC

Return-Path: <wes@mti-systems.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 9C53221F8748 for <ppsp@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 22 Feb 2012 07:44:49 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.599
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.000, BAYES_00=-2.599]
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 t9FZUNjpj-6U for <ppsp@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 22 Feb 2012 07:44:48 -0800 (PST)
Received: from omr7.networksolutionsemail.com (omr7.networksolutionsemail.com [205.178.146.57]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 927BF21F8746 for <ppsp@ietf.org>; Wed, 22 Feb 2012 07:44:48 -0800 (PST)
Received: from cm-omr14 (mail.networksolutionsemail.com [205.178.146.50]) by omr7.networksolutionsemail.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id q1MFiknh025284 for <ppsp@ietf.org>; Wed, 22 Feb 2012 10:44:47 -0500
Authentication-Results: cm-omr14 smtp.user=wes@mti-systems.com; auth=pass (PLAIN)
X-Authenticated-UID: wes@mti-systems.com
Received: from [107.46.41.98] ([107.46.41.98:9576] helo=[68.245.171.115]) by cm-omr14 (envelope-from <wes@mti-systems.com>) (ecelerity 2.2.2.41 r(31179/31189)) with ESMTPA id D6/E8-02762-D6D054F4; Wed, 22 Feb 2012 10:44:46 -0500
Message-ID: <4F450D72.9010504@mti-systems.com>
Date: Wed, 22 Feb 2012 10:44:50 -0500
From: Wesley Eddy <wes@mti-systems.com>
Organization: MTI Systems
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 5.1; rv:10.0.2) Gecko/20120216 Thunderbird/10.0.2
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: arno@cs.vu.nl
References: <2012021923584463860669@chinamobile.com>, <4F420CA8.8090701@cs.vu.nl> <2012022211013534382619@chinamobile.com> <4F4501F4.80704@cs.vu.nl>
In-Reply-To: <4F4501F4.80704@cs.vu.nl>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Cc: ppsp <ppsp@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [ppsp] PPSP Re-charter discussion
X-BeenThere: ppsp@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
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: Wed, 22 Feb 2012 15:44:49 -0000

On 2/22/2012 9:55 AM, Arno Bakker wrote:
> On 22/02/2012 04:15, zhangyunfei wrote:
>> The picture I imagine is that we have a mandatory media transport 
>> mechanim in PPSP. I don't mean to design
>> a new protocol parallel to UDP or TCP. Rather the spec should make it 
>> clear how to use UDP or TCP in PPSP environment. Maybe it also
>> involves some extensions above UDP or TCP.
> 
> Hi
> 
> what is the reason for describing media transport in a separate
> specification and not keeping it in the peer protocol spec where it is
> now (Section 6. Transport Protocols and Encapsulation)?
> 
> I'm afraid the PPSP specification will be fragmented over too many
> documents: 3 specs for the P2P part (peer proto spec, media transport
> spec and usage guide). Not nice for reading, not nice for authoring.


As an individual, I agree with Arno on this.


-- 
Wes Eddy
MTI Systems

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email