Re: [tcmtf] Improvements in the TCM-TF charter draft v8

Hi Marie,

After reading a while QUIC (https://docs.google.com/document/d/1RNHkx_VvKWyWg6Lr8SZ-saqsQx7rFV-ev2jRFUoVD34/edit), I understand that it tunnel and multiplex several transport flows between a client and a server. It works over UDP and could be very useful when web browsing because there is a lot of TCP flows interacting (one per web object).
Nevertheless, TCM-TF intends to be transparent for the end points and can tunnel, multiplex and compress several flows from different users between two any points within the network: for example, between a game server placed in Germany and one point aggregating hundreds of players in Spain (a transport router or whatever).

Regards,
Fernando

Fernando Pascual Blanco
Network Automation and Dynamization | Telefonica Global Resources
C/ Don Ramón de la Cruz 82-82, 28006, Madrid, España
fpb@tid.es<mailto:jessica.iglesiascarrera@telefonica.com> |F +34 91 312 8779  |  M +34 682 005 168

On 21/11/2013, at 13:00, Marie-Jose Montpetit <marie@mjmontpetit.com<mailto:marie@mjmontpetit.com>> wrote:

Look at QUIC amongst others.

Marie-José Montpetit
marie@mjmontpetit.com<mailto:marie@mjmontpetit.com>
mariejo@mit.edu<mailto:mariejo@mit.edu>

On Nov 21, 2013, at 6:56, FERNANDO PASCUAL BLANCO <fpb@tid.es<mailto:fpb@tid.es>> wrote:

Hi Marie,

I think transport accelerators are more focused in optimizing single data flows (compression and maybe tunneling). The main difference here would be the multiplexing of several data flows of different users. Please, if I am misunderstand you, provide more information about any other transport accelerator.

Un saludo,
Fernando

Fernando Pascual Blanco
Network Automation and Dynamization | Telefonica Global Resources
C/ Don Ramón de la Cruz 82-82, 28006, Madrid, España
fpb@tid.es<mailto:jessica.iglesiascarrera@telefonica.com> |F +34 91 312 8779  |  M +34 682 005 168

On 20/11/2013, at 21:32, Marie-Jose Montpetit <marie@mjmontpetit.com<mailto:marie@mjmontpetit.com>> wrote:

If there is a discussion about charter I would like to see how this is different from any other 'transport accelerators' especially if the use cases now include VoIP, wireless and satellite links not just real time gaming or video streaming.

/mjm

Marie-José Montpetit
mariejo@mit.edu<mailto:mariejo@mit.edu>

On Nov 20, 2013, at 11:19, "Eggert, Lars" <lars@netapp.com<mailto:lars@netapp.com>> wrote:

Hi,

On 2013-11-20, at 10:24, Jose Saldana <jsaldana@unizar.es<mailto:jsaldana@unizar.es>> wrote:
But if you want to use it in more than a single hop, ROHC has to be
tunneled, and you lose the savings achieved by compression. So the idea is
that a number of packets (multiplexed) share the tunnel overhead.

several of the scenarios you describe for TCM-TF seem to be fully addressed by ROHC, i.e., do not seem to have multiple L3 hops that require creation of a tunnel.

It would be good to explicitly limit yourself to describing scenarios that do have that requirement.

Lars
_______________________________________________
tcmtf mailing list
tcmtf@ietf.org<mailto:tcmtf@ietf.org>
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tcmtf

________________________________

Este mensaje se dirige exclusivamente a su destinatario. Puede consultar nuestra política de envío y recepción de correo electrónico en el enlace situado más abajo.
This message is intended exclusively for its addressee. We only send and receive email on the basis of the terms set out at:
http://www.tid.es/ES/PAGINAS/disclaimer.aspx

________________________________

Este mensaje se dirige exclusivamente a su destinatario. Puede consultar nuestra política de envío y recepción de correo electrónico en el enlace situado más abajo.
This message is intended exclusively for its addressee. We only send and receive email on the basis of the terms set out at:
http://www.tid.es/ES/PAGINAS/disclaimer.aspx