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

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

Hi, Lars.

In my previous e-mail I was saying that those two scenarios (cycling
competition and air-to-ground) involved a single hop, so they should be
removed.

So we agree.

Thanks,

Jose

> -----Mensaje original-----
> De: Eggert, Lars [mailto:[e-mail]]
> Enviado el: miércoles, 20 de noviembre de 2013 18:20
> Para: [e-mail]
> CC: [e-mail]; Martin Stiemerling; [e-mail]
> Asunto: Re: [tcmtf] Improvements in the TCM-TF charter draft v8
> 
> Hi,
> 
> On 2013-11-20, at 12:15, Jose Saldana <[e-mail]> wrote:
> > - a satellite connection used for providing connectivity in a
> > non-connected area during a short period of time (e.g. journalists
> > covering the arrival of a mountain stage of a cycling competition).
> 
> where does this scenario have multiple L3 hops involved? The bottleneck
link
> is the satellite hop.
> 
> > - an air-to-ground connection providing Internet connectivity to the
> > passengers of an aircraft, multiplexing a number of simultaneous VoIP
> flows.
> 
> Ditto, the bottleneck here is air-to-ground.
> 
> Lars
> 
> > Regarding these other two scenarios, perhaps TCM-TF would only be
> > interesting when there is a community network in which packets have to
> > traverse a (frequently high) number of hops:
> >
> > - a wireless Internet connection shared by a number of people in a
> > place with low Internet penetration
> > - a community network, in which a number of people in the same
> > geographical place share their connections in a cooperative way
> >
> > For example, in this scenario a community network with a high number
> > of hops is considered: http://www.guifi.net/en/guifi_zones. There is
> > also a paper about the topology of community networks: "On the
> > topology characterization of Guifi.net"
> > http://ieeexplore.ieee.org/xpls/abs_all.jsp?arnumber=6379103
> >
> > Thanks for your feedback!
> >
> > Jose
> >
> > -----Mensaje original-----
> > De: tcmtf [mailto:[e-mail]] En nombre de Eggert, Lars
> > Enviado el: miércoles, 20 de noviembre de 2013 17:20
> > Para: [e-mail]
> > CC: [e-mail]; Martin Stiemerling; [e-mail]
> > Asunto: Re: [tcmtf] Improvements in the TCM-TF charter draft v8
> >
> > Hi,
> >
> > On 2013-11-20, at 10:24, Jose Saldana <[e-mail]> 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
> >