[tcmtf] What about TCM-Optimizer --- TCM-Rebuilder?
"Jose Saldana" <jsaldana@unizar.es> Thu, 20 June 2013 07:23 UTC
Return-Path: <jsaldana@unizar.es>
X-Original-To: tcmtf@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: tcmtf@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix)
with ESMTP id 154C621E80DF for <tcmtf@ietfa.amsl.com>;
Thu, 20 Jun 2013 00:23:28 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -6.493
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.493 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.105,
BAYES_00=-2.599, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4]
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 vvxRA+MfczwC for
<tcmtf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 20 Jun 2013 00:23:22 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from huecha.unizar.es (huecha.unizar.es [155.210.1.51]) by
ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B4B9B21E80CB for <tcmtf@ietf.org>;
Thu, 20 Jun 2013 00:23:21 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from usuarioPC (gtc1pc12.cps.unizar.es [155.210.158.17]) by
huecha.unizar.es (8.13.8/8.13.8/Debian-3) with ESMTP id r5K7NIBd010586 for
<tcmtf@ietf.org>; Thu, 20 Jun 2013 09:23:18 +0200
From: "Jose Saldana" <jsaldana@unizar.es>
To: <tcmtf@ietf.org>
Date: Thu, 20 Jun 2013 09:23:20 +0200
Organization: Universidad de Zaragoza
Message-ID: <00e401ce6d87$0abe4fa0$203aeee0$@unizar.es>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
boundary="----=_NextPart_000_00E5_01CE6D97.CE471FA0"
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook 14.0
Thread-Index: Ac5thYCCEbR1J90FTvOEaRghIoqCAg==
Content-Language: es
X-Mail-Scanned: Criba 2.0 + Clamd & Bogofilter
Subject: [tcmtf] What about TCM-Optimizer --- TCM-Rebuilder?
X-BeenThere: tcmtf@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
Reply-To: jsaldana@unizar.es
List-Id: "Tunneling Compressed Multiplexed Traffic Flows \(TCMTF\) discussion
list" <tcmtf.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/tcmtf>,
<mailto:tcmtf-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/tcmtf>
List-Post: <mailto:tcmtf@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:tcmtf-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tcmtf>,
<mailto:tcmtf-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 20 Jun 2013 07:23:28 -0000
I was thinking on how should we call the pair of entities performing TCM optimization. It has been set clear that if we call them mux/demux, it is not exact, since we forget the tunnel and compressing layers. Last Monday I proposed "TCM-ingress optimizer" and "TCM-egress optimizer". However, I think these are too long names. I received a suggestion about TCM-optimizer / TCM-deoptimizer. But, who would buy a "deoptimizer"? So I have a better proposal: What about TCM optimizer <-----------------> TCM rebuilder? The egress entity "rebuilds" the packets to their native form. It is its main task: to deliver a packet exactly as it was at the ingress of the tunnel. "TCM reconstructor" could also be ok, but it is longer. Do you like it? Jose
- [tcmtf] What about TCM-Optimizer --- TCM-Rebuilde… Jose Saldana
- Re: [tcmtf] What about TCM-Optimizer --- TCM-Rebu… FERNANDO PASCUAL BLANCO