[ppsp] 答复: Comment on base tracker protocol binary encoding

Xiajinwei <xiajinwei@huawei.com> Fri, 07 November 2014 09:53 UTC

Return-Path: <xiajinwei@huawei.com>
X-Original-To: ppsp@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ppsp@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id F19BD1ACF70 for <ppsp@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 7 Nov 2014 01:53:11 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: 1.494
X-Spam-Level: *
X-Spam-Status: No, score=1.494 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, CHARSET_FARAWAY_HEADER=3.2, CN_BODY_35=0.339, MIME_8BIT_HEADER=0.3, MIME_CHARSET_FARAWAY=2.45, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.594, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id aUI6Vh0wFTOa for <ppsp@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 7 Nov 2014 01:53:09 -0800 (PST)
Received: from lhrrgout.huawei.com (lhrrgout.huawei.com [194.213.3.17]) (using TLSv1 with cipher RC4-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 619331ACF6F for <ppsp@ietf.org>; Fri, 7 Nov 2014 01:53:09 -0800 (PST)
Received: from 172.18.7.190 (EHLO lhreml405-hub.china.huawei.com) ([172.18.7.190]) by lhrrg01-dlp.huawei.com (MOS 4.3.7-GA FastPath queued) with ESMTP id BOM84721; Fri, 07 Nov 2014 09:53:06 +0000 (GMT)
Received: from NKGEML404-HUB.china.huawei.com (10.98.56.35) by lhreml405-hub.china.huawei.com (10.201.5.242) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 14.3.158.1; Fri, 7 Nov 2014 09:53:05 +0000
Received: from NKGEML501-MBS.china.huawei.com ([169.254.2.21]) by nkgeml404-hub.china.huawei.com ([10.98.56.35]) with mapi id 14.03.0158.001; Fri, 7 Nov 2014 17:52:57 +0800
From: Xiajinwei <xiajinwei@huawei.com>
To: "arno@cs.vu.nl" <arno@cs.vu.nl>, "Prof. Rui Santos Cruz Eng." <rui.cruz@ieee.org>
Thread-Topic: [ppsp] Comment on base tracker protocol binary encoding
Thread-Index: AQHP8cFuPnBVax7GLUSkdeRUzJUV55xDKuyAgAAo1ICAAAJ2AIAAO8yAgBFp8HA=
Date: Fri, 07 Nov 2014 09:52:57 +0000
Message-ID: <A8219E7785257C47B75B6DCE682F8D2F9010754E@nkgeml501-mbs.china.huawei.com>
References: <544E02A0.9060100@cs.vu.nl> <51E6A56BD6A85142B9D172C87FC3ABBB8624D461@nkgeml501-mbs.china.huawei.com> <544E35AF.3060906@cs.vu.nl> <74AA096A-8315-4348-88B2-BE6514379E45@ieee.org> <544E69E9.2020609@cs.vu.nl>
In-Reply-To: <544E69E9.2020609@cs.vu.nl>
Accept-Language: zh-CN, en-US
Content-Language: zh-CN
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
x-originating-ip: [10.138.41.164]
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="gb2312"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-CFilter-Loop: Reflected
Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ppsp/mxecnSAd1l7sYUVjUYiE9JzX1WQ
Cc: ppsp <ppsp@ietf.org>
Subject: [ppsp] 答复: Comment on base tracker protocol binary encoding
X-BeenThere: ppsp@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
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: Fri, 07 Nov 2014 09:53:12 -0000

Hi Arno,

We can move the specific encoding into appendices, if so, the content in appendix is just informative, not normative. But in my mind, the actual implementation may not use the codes.

BR
Jinwei


> -----邮件原件-----
> 发件人: ppsp [mailto:ppsp-bounces@ietf.org] 代表 Arno Bakker
> 发送时间: 2014年10月27日 23:51
> 收件人: Prof. Rui Santos Cruz Eng.
> 抄送: ppsp
> 主题: Re: [ppsp] Comment on base tracker protocol binary encoding
> 
> On 27/10/2014 13:17, Prof. Rui Santos Cruz Eng. wrote:
> > The idea for the new specification of the protocol, was to avoid
> > suggestions of encoding, leaving that to implementation.
> > Thee main reasons for delaying the approval process of previous
> > versions of the draft was for having included suggestions of encoding
> > (text or binary).
> >
> 
> Hi
> 
> I did not follow the whole discussion, but the draft should be such that
> interoperable implementations can be made. Weren't the encodings supposed
> to go into appendices?
> 
> CU,
>     Arno
> 
> _______________________________________________
> ppsp mailing list
> ppsp@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ppsp