IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [tcmtf] BoF feedback

"Muthu Arul Mozhi Perumal (mperumal)" <mperumal@cisco.com> Fri, 02 August 2013 20:25 UTC

Return-Path: <mperumal@cisco.com>
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 D7C1D21E8086 for <tcmtf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 2 Aug 2013 13:25:10 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -10.599
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-10.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-8]
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 5mn5Sxio5SJM for <tcmtf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 2 Aug 2013 13:25:06 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from rcdn-iport-9.cisco.com (rcdn-iport-9.cisco.com [173.37.86.80]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 492CA11E8102 for <tcmtf@ietf.org>; Fri, 2 Aug 2013 13:25:05 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=cisco.com; i=@cisco.com; l=2542; q=dns/txt; s=iport; t=1375475105; x=1376684705; h=from:to:subject:date:message-id:references:in-reply-to: content-transfer-encoding:mime-version; bh=9twBa99CTFUL/UrP1jinD9lsgQuZurSFybfUEqSH0Io=; b=RIyzbqPMpOm+Ejpz2KuoawNb1jHIHxB5kIE+s9gHSWHsfM+r9Frlhoir 6J4H5CHNrP55c31J5yr1ZuLyWDgfIpNkwJJT/BizGT7sdyIY+YKCHuVWB dA5nSAMuudDV7QJT+9/ReGRIkL7CyZOGm5ic6YE14MiMpO/34Tou7Lz8/ 8=;
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: AiwFAD0U/FGtJXG8/2dsb2JhbABQCoMGNVC/DYEeFnSCJAEBAQEDAQEBNzQEEwQCAQgOAwQBAQsUCQcnCxQJCAIEARIIiAgMuQMEjlYEgQ04BoMTdAOpLYMXgWhC
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.89,803,1367971200"; d="scan'208";a="239917706"
Received: from rcdn-core2-1.cisco.com ([173.37.113.188]) by rcdn-iport-9.cisco.com with ESMTP; 02 Aug 2013 20:25:04 +0000
Received: from xhc-rcd-x12.cisco.com (xhc-rcd-x12.cisco.com [173.37.183.86]) by rcdn-core2-1.cisco.com (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id r72KP3oN020218 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=FAIL); Fri, 2 Aug 2013 20:25:03 GMT
Received: from xmb-rcd-x02.cisco.com ([169.254.4.27]) by xhc-rcd-x12.cisco.com ([173.37.183.86]) with mapi id 14.02.0318.004; Fri, 2 Aug 2013 15:25:03 -0500
From: "Muthu Arul Mozhi Perumal (mperumal)" <mperumal@cisco.com>
To: Luigi Iannone <ggx@gigix.net>, "tcmtf@ietf.org" <tcmtf@ietf.org>
Thread-Topic: [tcmtf] BoF feedback
Thread-Index: AQHOj2wD5rXoL5C1bkKA8Y3n2L5aYJmCTy4A
Date: Fri, 02 Aug 2013 20:25:02 +0000
Message-ID: <E721D8C6A2E1544DB2DEBC313AF54DE2241CFE0C@xmb-rcd-x02.cisco.com>
References: <A5638BF5-0636-4277-B845-69252B131FD0@gigix.net>
In-Reply-To: <A5638BF5-0636-4277-B845-69252B131FD0@gigix.net>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
x-originating-ip: [10.65.33.23]
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
MIME-Version: 1.0
Subject: Re: [tcmtf] BoF feedback
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: Fri, 02 Aug 2013 20:25:11 -0000

TCMTF has clear and demonstrated benefits for VoIP and online gaming. CRTP/ECRTP has already enjoyed some success in reducing VoIP bandwidth over point-to-point WAN links, especially in those regions where access bandwidth is considerably expensive. TCMFT is a natural extension that encompasses better compression and tunneling technologies to achieve similar goals. 

The concerns raised during the BoF seemed in relation to generalizing it for other kinds of traffic and TCP in particular. This generalization though important (especially in the context of Internet of Things as echoed by Michael Ramalho during the BoF) could probably be deferred for future work (TCMTF2.0?) and the scope limited to VoIP and online gaming to begin with, IMO. As we work through the limited scope, how (and how not) to apply it for other kinds of traffic should become more clear, I think.

Muthu

|-----Original Message-----
|From: tcmtf-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:tcmtf-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Luigi Iannone
|Sent: Friday, August 02, 2013 4:05 PM
|To: tcmtf@ietf.org
|Subject: [tcmtf] BoF feedback
|
|Hi,
|
|I was thinking a little bit about the turn the BoF took yesterday, going a bit off topic IMHO.
|
|At a certain point people were going to the mic to explain yet another scenario where TCMTF would not
|work or is not useful.
|
|It is obvious to me that such scenarios exist, but  the goal of TCMTF is not to provide something that
|will be applied to all packets under a certain size.
|
|It is also obvious to me that scenarios where TCMTF is beneficial exist as well. Goal of TCMTF should
|be to provide the right mechanism for those scenarios.
|
|A key point to discuss in TCMTF is how we identify and select the flow we want to be multiplexed on a
|single compressed tunnel.
|
|All of this to say that we should not focus or scenarios where TCMTF doesn't help but rather to answer
|the following question:
|
|Are there scenarios and use cases where TCMTF provides benefits?
|
|The answer IMHO is YES so some work should be done.
|
|Just let me add that,  before thinking how to encapsulate we should answer: How do we select the flows
|we want to encamp?
|
|So that we are sure that we do not touch traffic that will suffer because of TCMTF.
|
|Just my thoughts after the BoF.
|
|ciao
|
|Luigi
|
|
|_______________________________________________
|tcmtf mailing list
|tcmtf@ietf.org
|https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tcmtf

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email