[TERNLI] New I-D on cross-layer indications for transport protocols
Pasi Sarolahti <pasi.sarolahti@iki.fi> Mon, 16 October 2006 12:11 UTC
Received: from [127.0.0.1] (helo=stiedprmman1.va.neustar.com) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1GZRJi-0006TX-QL; Mon, 16 Oct 2006 08:11:38 -0400
Received: from [10.91.34.44] (helo=ietf-mx.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1GZPHp-0001QZ-Ng for ternli@ietf.org; Mon, 16 Oct 2006 06:01:33 -0400
Received: from courier.cs.helsinki.fi ([128.214.9.1] helo=mail.cs.helsinki.fi) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1GZPCa-0007PN-Li for ternli@ietf.org; Mon, 16 Oct 2006 05:56:09 -0400
Received: from 192.168.0.100 (net-79.nrpn.net [192.89.6.79]) (AUTH: PLAIN sarolaht, SSL: TLSv1/SSLv3,128bits,RC4-MD5) by mail.cs.helsinki.fi with esmtp; Mon, 16 Oct 2006 12:56:08 +0300 id 000AFDD0.45335738.00001E25
From: Pasi Sarolahti <pasi.sarolahti@iki.fi>
To: ternli@ietf.org
Date: Mon, 16 Oct 2006 12:56:08 +0300
Message-Id: <1160992568.11305.7.camel@hed040-213.research.nokia.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg="pgp-sha1"; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="=_courier-7717-1160992568-0001-2"
X-Mailer: Evolution 2.0.2 (2.0.2-27)
X-Spam-Score: 0.1 (/)
X-Scan-Signature: cab78e1e39c4b328567edb48482b6a69
X-Mailman-Approved-At: Mon, 16 Oct 2006 08:11:38 -0400
Cc:
Subject: [TERNLI] New I-D on cross-layer indications for transport protocols
X-BeenThere: ternli@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5
Precedence: list
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
Folks, Sally Floyd and I submitted a new Internet-Draft titled "Cross-layer Indications for Transport Protocols". The draft aims to summarize the past work done on this area and describe the known challenges with different types of cross-layer notification schemes. This problem area was discussed in the ad-hoc TERNLI meeting at the last IETF, and I think feelings there were generally positive about having a draft that would give an overview of the problem space. The -00 version is yet missing some bits, but we'd like to get input already at an early stage: does the current approach seem viable? What is missing (quite a bit, I guess)? Is the past work described correctly? Do you think this kind of document would be useful? Before it gets to the repository, the draft is available at http://www.icir.org/floyd/papers/draft-sarolahti-tsvwg-crosslayer-00.txt and http://www.icir.org/floyd/papers/draft-sarolahti-tsvwg-crosslayer-00.ps Thanks, - Pasi
- [TERNLI] New I-D on cross-layer indications for t… Pasi Sarolahti