RE: [TERNLI] Notes from tonight's ad hoc

"Kevin Fall" <kfall@intel.com> Fri, 28 July 2006 12:16 UTC

Received: from [127.0.0.1] (helo=stiedprmman1.va.neustar.com) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1G6RGV-0005k5-Nf; Fri, 28 Jul 2006 08:16:27 -0400
Received: from [10.91.34.44] (helo=ietf-mx.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1G6RGV-0005k0-81 for ternli@ietf.org; Fri, 28 Jul 2006 08:16:27 -0400
Received: from mga03.intel.com ([143.182.124.21] helo=azsmga101-1.ch.intel.com) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1G6RGT-0005XD-U1 for ternli@ietf.org; Fri, 28 Jul 2006 08:16:27 -0400
Received: from azsmga001.ch.intel.com ([10.2.17.19]) by azsmga101-1.ch.intel.com with ESMTP; 28 Jul 2006 05:16:25 -0700
Received: from saspfm01.fm.intel.com (HELO kfallmobl) ([10.19.12.5]) by azsmga001.ch.intel.com with ESMTP; 28 Jul 2006 05:16:21 -0700
X-IronPort-AV: i="4.07,191,1151910000"; d="scan'208"; a="72217575:sNHT14730023"
From: "Kevin Fall" <kfall@intel.com>
To: <mallman@icir.org>, <weddy@grc.nasa.gov>
Subject: RE: [TERNLI] Notes from tonight's ad hoc
Date: Fri, 28 Jul 2006 05:16:18 -0700
Organization: Intel Research Berkeley
Message-ID: <002301c6b23f$a3ef4a90$0300a8c0@kfallmobl>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Microsoft Office Outlook 11
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2869
Thread-Index: AcayO4a9ROcRDoA7Rz+LFWNT5bTluAAA77dw
In-Reply-To: <20060728114353.275FB444296@lawyers.icir.org>
X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/)
X-Scan-Signature: bb8f917bb6b8da28fc948aeffb74aa17
Cc: ternli@ietf.org
X-BeenThere: ternli@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5
Precedence: list
Reply-To: kfall@intel.com
List-Id: Transport-Enhancing Refinements to the Network Layer Interface <ternli.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ternli>, <mailto:ternli-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www1.ietf.org/pipermail/ternli>
List-Post: <mailto:ternli@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:ternli-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ternli>, <mailto:ternli-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
Errors-To: ternli-bounces@ietf.org

I'm not sure how clear-cut it is.  E.g..  a path change might imply a
likelihood of a significant capacity and latency change.  A capacity change
due only to modulation change would likely affect the latency less
drammatically, I would think.  On the "other other" hand, the system could
generate two indicators on a path change :P.

- K

> -----Original Message-----
> From: mallman@icir.org [mailto:mallman@icir.org]
> Sent: Friday, July 28, 2006 4:44 AM
> To: weddy@grc.nasa.gov
> Cc: Kevin Fall; ternli@ietf.org
> Subject: Re: [TERNLI] Notes from tonight's ad hoc
> 
> 
> > 802.16 also has adaptive modulation and coding that alter the rate of
> > the channel and may vary as the distance between a base station and
> > subscriber station changes.  Adaptive coding is common for satellite
> > links as well.  It seems like this type of event could be useful to
> > signal if it resulted in more than a doubling or halving of capacity, as
> > a simple filter.
> 
> One way to look at this is that the "type of event" is not at all
> important to communicate.  The real thing to get across is the available
> capacity has changed somewhat dramatically.  Does it really matter if
> this is because 802.11 dropped us from 11mbps to 2mbps or some BoD
> system just allocated us a ton of capacity or we moved much closer to
> some access point / basestation and now have a much better signal?
> 
> Does this make sense?
> 
> allman
> 
>