Re: [tcmtf] BoF proposal for Berlin. Possible scheme

["Jose Saldana" <[e-mail]>]

Hi, Mirko.

 

The idea of energy savings is also interesting. People are getting more and
more concerned with the energy consumption. Not only European Commission,
but also smartphone and tablet manufacturers: the duration of the battery is
critical there.

 

For example, "Qualcomm has developed a solution called Network Socket
Request Manager (NSRM) for efficient application management. NSRM reduces
smart phone signaling traffic by bundling application requests and
intelligently delaying them. NSRM provides significant signaling reduction
and also improves stand-by time."

 
<http://www.qualcomm.com/media/documents/qualcomm-research-managing-backgrou
nd-data-traffic-mobile-devices>
http://www.qualcomm.com/media/documents/qualcomm-research-managing-backgroun
d-data-traffic-mobile-devices

 

Perhaps we could also include this idea in the presentations. The benefits
of packet grouping are 3 instead of 2:

 

1- Bandwidth saving

2- PPS reduction

3- Energy savings

 

What do you think? Will people at the IETF like energy savings?

 

Best regards,

 

Jose

 

De: [e-mail] [mailto:[e-mail]] En nombre de
Mirko Sužnjevic
Enviado el: martes, 14 de mayo de 2013 10:08
Para: [e-mail]
Asunto: Re: [tcmtf] BoF proposal for Berlin. Possible scheme

 

Hello everybody,

Well I concur with the structure. I believe that the main thing is to do is
to well formulate and explain the problem. We must prove in a coherent way
that the problem we are addressing here is a problem worth putting effort to
and worth solving. In short we must present all the benefits the  solving of
our problem might bring. We more or less covered the network aspects of the
TCMTF. Maybe one of the previously not emphasized things is the notion of
energy savings which TCMTF implementation might bring.  I am not certain
would such topics be interesting in the IETF, but it was interesting for the
European Commission.

Ofcourse I will create the presentation regarding my part.


Cheers!

Mirko Suznjevic

 

 

From: Jose Saldana [mailto:[e-mail]] 
Sent: Monday, May 13, 2013 12:25 PM
To: [e-mail]
Cc: Martin Stiemerling; Dan Wing; Mirko Sužnjević
Subject: BoF proposal for Berlin. Possible scheme

 

Hi all.

 

According to http://www.ietf.org/meeting/cutoff-dates-2013.html#IETF87,
2013-06-17 (Monday) is the cutoff date for BOF proposal requests to Area
Directors. So we still have a month.

 

we could discuss a bit the possible scheme for the BoF proposal.

 

According to Martin's suggestion, we could begin the session with a teaser
presentation describing what the exact issues are and what is the need for
standardization.

 

So we could follow this structure:

 

1- Teaser presentation: describing the problem and the need for
standardization

 

2- Charter: Documents to be generated within this potential WG

 

3- Draft A: Explaining the current TCMTF proposal

 

4- Draft B: Explaining the content of the draft about delay requirements,
classification methods, etc.

 

 

Dan Wing could be in charge of (1). This would be good, since he is one of
the authors of RFC4170 (the RFC we should "update" with TCMTF), so he knows
the whole story. In addition, he has been in the TCMTF draft from the very
beginning.

 

I could be in charge of (2), mainly explaining the charter.

 

Perhaps someone from Telefonica could be in charge of (3).

 

Mirko Suznjevic could present (4), since he is the first author.

 

 

 

What do you think? Any ideas?

 

Thanks a lot and best regards!,

 

Jose