[tcmtf] New version (v9) of the TCM-TF Charter draft. Comments

"Jose Saldana" <jsaldana@unizar.es> Wed, 27 November 2013 14:42 UTC

Return-Path: <jsaldana@unizar.es>
X-Original-To: tcmtf@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: tcmtf@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com []) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3148E1AE03F; Wed, 27 Nov 2013 06:42:06 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -4.201
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.201 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id NOztsCq-B9dh; Wed, 27 Nov 2013 06:41:51 -0800 (PST)
Received: from isuela.unizar.es (isuela.unizar.es []) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5337A1ACC82; Wed, 27 Nov 2013 06:41:37 -0800 (PST)
Received: from usuarioPC (gtc1pc12.cps.unizar.es []) by isuela.unizar.es (8.13.8/8.13.8/Debian-3) with ESMTP id rAREfS6U010500; Wed, 27 Nov 2013 15:41:32 +0100
From: "Jose Saldana" <jsaldana@unizar.es>
To: <tcmtf@ietf.org>, <tsv-area@ietf.org>
Date: Wed, 27 Nov 2013 15:41:43 +0100
Organization: Universidad de Zaragoza
Message-ID: <004a01ceeb7e$cabd3fd0$6037bf70$@unizar.es>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_004B_01CEEB87.2C824410"
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook 14.0
Thread-Index: Ac7raZEbSdWVtBSqSaqtcV6OdudNYg==
Content-Language: es
X-Mail-Scanned: Criba 2.0 + Clamd & Bogofilter
Cc: Martin Stiemerling <mls.ietf@googlemail.com>, 'Spencer Dawkins' <spencerdawkins.ietf@gmail.com>
Subject: [tcmtf] New version (v9) of the TCM-TF Charter draft. Comments
X-BeenThere: tcmtf@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
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: Wed, 27 Nov 2013 14:42:06 -0000
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 27 Nov 2013 14:42:06 -0000

Hi all.


According to what we have discussed in the list in the last weeks, I have
re-built the Charter. It is in another e-mail, just sent to the list.


These are the main improvements:


a) the points have been reordered in order to show clearly that we are
widening the scope of an already existing standard (RFC4170). We are not
inventing something new, just broadening the scope of an already existing


b) The explaining of Reinaldo about why a middlebox (instead of allocating
more bandwidth) can be interesting in some cases has been included in number


c) According to what Lars said, I have clearly stated that a single L3 hop
can be covered with ROHC (number 3).


d) Scenarios:

- I have included the classification of David.

- I have removed some scenarios with a single hop, according to what Lars
and Reinaldo said.


e) According to Reinaldo suggestion, I have included number 6 stating that
we want bandwidth savings and pps reductions. I have also included some
figures reporting the expected savings.


f) I have removed the duplicate reference to satellites.


g) I have clearly stated that the "TCM-TF reference model" will clearly
specify the scenarios.


h) In number 8, I have said that "The impact on other protocols will also be



Thanks a lot for your help,