[ppsp] tickets for IETF 83

zhangyunfei <zhangyunfei@chinamobile.com> Thu, 03 May 2012 08:54 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 A9A0021F85D3 for <ppsp@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 3 May 2012 01:54:05 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -93.474
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-93.474 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=1.665, BAYES_50=0.001, HTML_FONT_FACE_BAD=0.884, 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 AqhetlE+GJ-d for <ppsp@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 3 May 2012 01:54:05 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from imss.chinamobile.com (imss.chinamobile.com [221.130.253.135]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8F89621F8474 for <ppsp@ietf.org>; Thu, 3 May 2012 01:54:04 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from imss.chinamobile.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by localhost.chinamobile.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 71309E550; Thu, 3 May 2012 16:53:46 +0800 (CST)
Received: from mail.chinamobile.com (unknown [10.1.28.22]) by imss.chinamobile.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 72EFFE5BC; Thu, 3 May 2012 16:53:22 +0800 (CST)
Received: from zyf-PC ([10.2.43.220]) by mail.chinamobile.com (Lotus Domino Release 6.5.6) with ESMTP id 2012050316124095-15247 ; Thu, 3 May 2012 16:12:40 +0800
Date: Thu, 03 May 2012 16:12:38 +0800
From: zhangyunfei <zhangyunfei@chinamobile.com>
To: ppsp <ppsp@ietf.org>
X-Priority: 3 (Normal)
X-Mailer: Foxmail 7.0.1.85[cn]
Mime-Version: 1.0
Message-ID: <2012050316123830359558@chinamobile.com>
X-MIMETrack: Itemize by SMTP Server on jtgsml01/servers/cmcc(Release 6.5.6|March 06, 2007) at 2012-05-03 16:12:40, Serialize by Router on jtgsml01/servers/cmcc(Release 6.5.6|March 06, 2007) at 2012-05-03 16:53:21, Serialize complete at 2012-05-03 16:53:21
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_001_NextPart084653368635_=----"
X-TM-AS-Product-Ver: IMSS-7.0.0.8231-6.8.0.1017-18880.006
X-TM-AS-Result: No--23.803-7.0-31-10
X-imss-scan-details: No--23.803-7.0-31-10;No--23.803-7.0-31-10
X-TM-AS-User-Approved-Sender: No;No
X-TM-AS-User-Blocked-Sender: No;No
Subject: [ppsp] tickets for IETF 83
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: Thu, 03 May 2012 08:54:05 -0000

Hi all,
    I have summarized an initial tickets list for IETF 83 meeting. Please review it and actions on these tickets are expected. Thanks.

BR
Yunfei &Stefano
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Peer protocol:
Ticket #1:Post and discuss the alternative proposal besides MHT in peer protocol (Proposal 10+13), list intervals (Tradeoff among complexity / overhead / efficiency / implementation) and check gaps. [Martin, Yunfei, Fabio, Lichun]
This ticket is partly solved. Simple nature number addressing and ranged expression on chunk availability. The analysis and comparison is ongoing. I'd suggest to have a deadline for the resolution time after discussing with Stefano, i.e.,  May 26th from now on to make the decision in the WG level.

Ticket #2:Discuss the possible “"state-building attacks" attack on peers.[Martin](related Proposal 26)
Martin, Do you still have concerns on this? If nobody shows up, we propose to close this ticket.

Ticket #3: Discuss the Membership certificates impact on the tracker’s workload.[Fabio](related to Proposal 17+20)

Tracker protocol:
Ticket#4: Specify the FIND use case and reduce the overhead to the tracker.[Martin,Yunfei,Fabio,Richardo]
Ticket#5: Discuss concrete use cases of additional messages if there are(e.g.,reconnect and rejoin) , and conclude the basic messages and optional ones in tracker protocol. [Mark, Fabio]
 We propose to the tracker protocol authors to address their tickets with a splitting of their proposal:
. base spec
. additional options.

Survey
Ticket#6: Call for reviewers for survey draft, and maybe P2P streaming providers’ contribution on updating the draft.   




zhangyunfei