Re: [dtn] proposed DTN workgroup - what is process being followed?

["Juan A. Fraire" <juanfraire@xxxxxxxxx>]

Thanks Will, 

I'm aware of CCSDS/IETF raison d'etre. My thought is: If you guys say it is good for millions of nodes, then it should be the same for 10s of them. I just want to cross-check on that. 

Thanks for the info :)

J.Fraire

On Thu, Oct 23, 2014 at 11:52 AM, Ivancic, William D. (GRC-LCA0) <william.d.ivancic@xxxxxxxx> wrote:

Juan,

Remember,  we are not just discussing space applications. We are discussing general applications hundreds of millions of nodes.

Bundling may work well for your application in space with four or five nodes, but perhaps not so much for general Internet.  Remember IETF is INTERNET Engineering Task Force.  CCSDS is Space.  If IETF is going to work on something, it needs to address the general needs of the Internet user base, not just Space.  That is CCSDS' realm.

Will

A good overview:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3zOLrQJ5kbU

Some papers are here with link to  presentations.  

http://named-data.net/publications/

But above is just one viewpoint of ICN.  ICNRG should lead you to others.

https://irtf.org/icnrg

A publish/subscribe architecture is what BBN came up with for F6 (Fractionated Spacecraft)

http://dl.acm.org/citation.cfm?doid=2348616.2348626

Will

******************************

William D. Ivancic

Phone 216-433-3494

Mobile 440-503-4892

http://roland.grc.nasa.gov/~ivancic

From: "Juan A. Fraire" <juanfraire@xxxxxxxxx>
Date: Thursday, October 23, 2014 10:10 AM
To: William Ivancic <ivancic@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Cc: "ietf@xxxxxxxx" <ietf@xxxxxxxx>, Kevin Fall <kfall@xxxxxxxxx>, Martin Stiemerling <mls.ietf@xxxxxxxxx>, "iab@xxxxxxx" <iab@xxxxxxx>, "iesg@xxxxxxxx" <iesg@xxxxxxxx>, Lloyd Wood <lloyd.wood@xxxxxxxxxxx>, "dtn@xxxxxxxx" <dtn@xxxxxxxx>

Subject: Re: [dtn] proposed DTN workgroup - what is process being followed?

Hi Will,

Where can I read (not slides) about how ICN handles routing, forwarding, buffering, network-level congestion, and contact predictability? Is there an RFC or good article about these?

Thanks,

J.Fraire

Universidad Nacional de Córdoba, Argentina

On Thu, Oct 23, 2014 at 9:47 AM, William Ivancic <ivancic@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

Hi Kevin,

Yes, I worked closely with this group.  Chart 19 says it all. Buy the way, don't confuse the need for DTN with the need for the Bundle protocol.  Chart 19 supports Wes' comments.  There is not way this group can deploy large networks without item 2.

Challenging network environment leads to link and network disruptions

1. Need to develop a robust DTN based transport service
2. Requires solutions to addressing, routing, management, discovery and forwarding/QOS

I have not seen this group actively participating on any of the DTN mail list in the past year or two or perhaps more.  Time flies.

Will

---

From: Kevin Fall <kfall@xxxxxxxxx>
To: William Ivancic <ivancic@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Cc: "ietf@xxxxxxxx" <ietf@xxxxxxxx>; Martin Stiemerling <mls.ietf@xxxxxxxxx>; "iab@xxxxxxx" <iab@xxxxxxx>; "iesg@xxxxxxxx" <iesg@xxxxxxxx>; Lloyd Wood <lloyd.wood@xxxxxxxxxxx>; "dtn@xxxxxxxx" <dtn@xxxxxxxx>
Sent: Wednesday, October 22, 2014 3:27 PM
Subject: Re: [dtn] proposed DTN workgroup - what is process being followed?

Based on a meeting I recently attended and 2014 references such as this:

(http://nsrc.cse.psu.edu/talks_2014/thoughts_on_future_army_waveforms_20Mar2014.pdf)

I cannot share your conclusion.

_______________________________________________
dtn mailing list
dtn@xxxxxxxx
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dtn