IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [tcmtf] A terminological question: "small-packet flows"

gorry@erg.abdn.ac.uk Wed, 12 June 2013 15:54 UTC

Return-Path: <gorry@erg.abdn.ac.uk>
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 4A4FE21F9A63 for <tcmtf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 12 Jun 2013 08:54:46 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -106.599
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-106.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100]
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 EOqSJoBtTr50 for <tcmtf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 12 Jun 2013 08:54:38 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from spey.erg.abdn.ac.uk (spey.erg.abdn.ac.uk [139.133.204.173]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 53A4821F99AF for <tcmtf@ietf.org>; Wed, 12 Jun 2013 08:54:35 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from www.erg.abdn.ac.uk (blake.erg.abdn.ac.uk [139.133.210.30]) by spey.erg.abdn.ac.uk (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 8DB582B41E9; Wed, 12 Jun 2013 16:54:32 +0100 (BST)
Received: from 139.133.204.42 (SquirrelMail authenticated user gorry) by www.erg.abdn.ac.uk with HTTP; Wed, 12 Jun 2013 16:54:32 +0100
Message-ID: <5b0ced243ea27ff5d78b7b3e959faf75.squirrel@www.erg.abdn.ac.uk>
In-Reply-To: <008101ce676e$3b4675e0$b1d361a0$@unizar.es>
References: <008101ce676e$3b4675e0$b1d361a0$@unizar.es>
Date: Wed, 12 Jun 2013 16:54:32 +0100
From: gorry@erg.abdn.ac.uk
To: jsaldana@unizar.es
User-Agent: SquirrelMail/1.4.22
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;charset=iso-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-Priority: 3 (Normal)
Importance: Normal
Cc: tcmtf@ietf.org, =?iso-8859-1?Q?=22Mirko_Su=BEnjevi=E6=22?= <mirko.suznjevic@fer.hr>
Subject: Re: [tcmtf] A terminological question: "small-packet flows"
X-BeenThere: tcmtf@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
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, 12 Jun 2013 15:54:47 -0000

If you're talking about TCP ACKs RFC 3449 could be relevant.

Gorry

> Hi all.
>
>
>
> Mirko and I are working on an improved version of the "TCMTF -
> recommendations" document. Since TCMTF is not only suitable for real-time
> services, but also for non real-time ones (M2M, flows of ACKs, instant
> messaging), one possibility is using the term "small-packet flows".
>
>
>
> The advantages are clear:
>
>
>
> - It is more generic.
>
> - It includes the characteristics of TCMTF-able packets:
>
> - low payload-to-header ratio
>
> - long-term flows
>
>
>
> This term is also being used in some technical documents:
> www.huawei.com/ilink/en/download/HW_193034.
>
>
>
> What do you think? Any other proposals?
>
>
>
> Jose
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> tcmtf mailing list
> tcmtf@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tcmtf
>

v2.8.7 | Report a Bug | By Email