9 Nov 2009 02:08
11 Nov 2009 04:41
DCCP minutes
Pasi Sarolahti <pasi.sarolahti <at> iki.fi>
2009-11-11 03:41:05 GMT
2009-11-11 03:41:05 GMT
Hello, Please see the draft meeting minutes below. Many thanks to Colin for taking the notes! I have done minor clarifications, mostly to speakers' names. Let me know if you have corrections to make. - Pasi ---------------------- DCCP - IETF 76 Hiroshima Tuesday, November 10, 0900 - 1000 Chair: Pasi Sarolahti Note taker: Colin Perkins 15 attendees Status: Pasi presents slides. re draft-ietf-dccp-rtp: Magnus notes that the rtcpssm draft has been updated, and is back with the IESG re udp encapsulation - Magnus Westerlund: issue will be discussed in tsvarea on Friday. Magnus is split on the idea, he sees the benefit, but also the concern - Colin Perkins: we have an implementation of the nat encapsulation(Continue reading)
15 Nov 2009 21:11
Re: DCCP minutes
Leandro Sales <leandroal <at> gmail.com>
2009-11-15 20:11:48 GMT
2009-11-15 20:11:48 GMT
Hust to let you know, we have provided DCCP support in the following libs: - GStreamer Framework - GNU Common CPP - GNU uCommon - GNU CCRTP In addition to this, we are work on providing support of DCCP in the Twinkle Softphone. Thank you, Leandro. On Wed, Nov 11, 2009 at 12:41 AM, Pasi Sarolahti <pasi.sarolahti <at> iki.fi> wrote: > Hello, > > Please see the draft meeting minutes below. Many thanks to Colin for taking > the notes! I have done minor clarifications, mostly to speakers' names. Let > me know if you have corrections to make. > > - Pasi > > ---------------------- > > DCCP - IETF 76 Hiroshima > Tuesday, November 10, 0900 - 1000 > Chair: Pasi Sarolahti > Note taker: Colin Perkins > > 15 attendees(Continue reading)
16 Nov 2009 11:41
Re: DCCP minutes
Gorry Fairhurst <gorry <at> erg.abdn.ac.uk>
2009-11-16 10:41:20 GMT
2009-11-16 10:41:20 GMT
Here are some more links that may be of interest: http://eden-feed.erg.abdn.ac.uk/ http://www.linuxfoundation.org/en/Net:DCCP_Testing Gorry Leandro Sales wrote: > Just to let you know, we have provided DCCP support in the following libs: > > - GStreamer Framework > - GNU Common CPP > - GNU uCommon > - GNU CCRTP > > In addition to this, we are work on providing support of DCCP in the > Twinkle Softphone. > > Thank you, > Leandro. > > On Wed, Nov 11, 2009 at 12:41 AM, Pasi Sarolahti <pasi.sarolahti <at> iki.fi> wrote: >> Hello, >> >> Please see the draft meeting minutes below. Many thanks to Colin for taking >> the notes! I have done minor clarifications, mostly to speakers' names. Let >> me know if you have corrections to make. >> >> - Pasi(Continue reading)
16 Nov 2009 15:53
Request for review of MulTFRC
Michael Welzl <michawe <at> ifi.uio.no>
2009-11-16 14:53:08 GMT
2009-11-16 14:53:08 GMT
Dear congestion controllers! We are urgently looking for reviewers for MulTFRC, which is a new congestion control mechanism by Dragana Damjanovic and myself. A page with all documentation and code is here: http://heim.ifi.uio.no/~michawe/research/projects/multfrc/index.html I also made the usual ICCRG page, with links to some comments that we already received: http://tools.ietf.org/group/irtf/trac/wiki/ICCRG_multfrc Our intention is to get this approved as a WG item of the DCCP WG, with the plan to publish draft-welzl-multfrc-01.txt (the congestion control mechanism description) as an Experimental RFC, and also write a CCID specification for DCCP which should also become an Experimental RFC. I presented DCCP in the ICCRG meeting of the Stockholm IETF. Dragana presented it in the DCCP meeting in Hiroshima last week, where a part of the feedback was that the ICCRG should review the congestion control mechanism to be sure it's safe to deploy. The CCID specification (which doesn't yet exist) could then be discussed in the DCCP group only. MulTFRC is, as the name suggests, an extension of TFRC to support multiple flows (much like MulTCP is such an extension of TCP). To refine what the "safe to deploy" consideration could mean, I'd like to quote a statement from Michio Honda, from his comments about MulTFRC that he sent to the DCCP list: "I guess the IETF needs to establish the criterion and principle of N-TCP-friendliness before MulTFRC going ahead."(Continue reading)
16 Nov 2009 16:13
Re: DCCP minutes
Phelan, Tom <tphelan <at> sonusnet.com>
2009-11-16 15:13:18 GMT
2009-11-16 15:13:18 GMT
Hi Leandro, Thanks for letting us know about your activities! Tom P. > -----Original Message----- > From: dccp-bounces <at> ietf.org [mailto:dccp-bounces <at> ietf.org] On Behalf Of > Leandro Sales > Sent: Sunday, November 15, 2009 3:12 PM > To: Pasi Sarolahti > Cc: DCCP working group > Subject: Re: [dccp] DCCP minutes > > Hust to let you know, we have provided DCCP support in the following libs: > > - GStreamer Framework > - GNU Common CPP > - GNU uCommon > - GNU CCRTP > > In addition to this, we are work on providing support of DCCP in the > Twinkle Softphone. > > Thank you, > Leandro. > > On Wed, Nov 11, 2009 at 12:41 AM, Pasi Sarolahti(Continue reading)
16 Nov 2009 18:39
Re: DCCP minutes
Leandro Sales <leandroal <at> gmail.com>
2009-11-16 17:39:29 GMT
2009-11-16 17:39:29 GMT
You're welcome. In addition, I'm working with the folks from http://eden-feed.erg.abdn.ac.uk/ by providing the implementation for CCID-4 in the linux kernel. Thank you, Leandro. On Mon, Nov 16, 2009 at 12:13 PM, Phelan, Tom <tphelan <at> sonusnet.com> wrote: > Hi Leandro, > > Thanks for letting us know about your activities! > > Tom P. > >> -----Original Message----- >> From: dccp-bounces <at> ietf.org [mailto:dccp-bounces <at> ietf.org] On Behalf > Of >> Leandro Sales >> Sent: Sunday, November 15, 2009 3:12 PM >> To: Pasi Sarolahti >> Cc: DCCP working group >> Subject: Re: [dccp] DCCP minutes >> >> Hust to let you know, we have provided DCCP support in the following > libs: >> >> - GStreamer Framework >> - GNU Common CPP >> - GNU uCommon >> - GNU CCRTP(Continue reading)
16 Nov 2009 22:21
Re: DCCP minutes
Andrew Lentvorski <bsder <at> allcaps.org>
2009-11-16 21:21:13 GMT
2009-11-16 21:21:13 GMT
Pasi Sarolahti wrote: > re udp encapsulation > - Magnus Westerlund: issue will be discussed in tsvarea on Friday. > Magnus is split on the idea, he sees the benefit, but also the concern > > - Colin Perkins: we have an implementation of the nat encapsulation > > - Murari Sridharan: lots of people are trying to implement, but the lack > of firewall traversal is stopping people. some udp encap would be good. > > - Markku Kojo: don't need a spec, just fill out the iana form > > - Magnus: yes, but a spec is importent. What was the final result about UDP encapsulation and NAT traversal? -a
16 Nov 2009 22:47
Re: DCCP minutes
Pasi Sarolahti <pasi.sarolahti <at> iki.fi>
2009-11-16 21:47:30 GMT
2009-11-16 21:47:30 GMT
On Nov 16, 2009, at 1:21 PM, Andrew Lentvorski wrote: >> re udp encapsulation >> - Magnus Westerlund: issue will be discussed in tsvarea on Friday. >> Magnus is split on the idea, he sees the benefit, but also the >> concern >> - Colin Perkins: we have an implementation of the nat encapsulation >> - Murari Sridharan: lots of people are trying to implement, but the >> lack of firewall traversal is stopping people. some udp encap would >> be good. >> - Markku Kojo: don't need a spec, just fill out the iana form >> - Magnus: yes, but a spec is importent. > > What was the final result about UDP encapsulation and NAT traversal? You forgot to quote one line from this part: > - Colin: why don't we just publish Tom Phelan's draft as > experimental? Ask Tom to resubmit it (or I'll do it...) I believe Tom plans to update the UDP encapsulation draft, and when done, we will then see where to go from there. - Pasi
16 Nov 2009 23:02
Re: DCCP minutes
Phelan, Tom <tphelan <at> sonusnet.com>
2009-11-16 22:02:31 GMT
2009-11-16 22:02:31 GMT
Yes, I do plan on updating the natencap draft -- any day now... Tom P. ________________________________ From: dccp-bounces <at> ietf.org on behalf of Pasi Sarolahti Sent: Mon 11/16/2009 4:47 PM To: Andrew Lentvorski Cc: DCCP working group Subject: Re: [dccp] DCCP minutes On Nov 16, 2009, at 1:21 PM, Andrew Lentvorski wrote: >> re udp encapsulation >> - Magnus Westerlund: issue will be discussed in tsvarea on Friday. >> Magnus is split on the idea, he sees the benefit, but also the >> concern >> - Colin Perkins: we have an implementation of the nat encapsulation >> - Murari Sridharan: lots of people are trying to implement, but the >> lack of firewall traversal is stopping people. some udp encap would >> be good. >> - Markku Kojo: don't need a spec, just fill out the iana form >> - Magnus: yes, but a spec is importent. > > What was the final result about UDP encapsulation and NAT traversal? You forgot to quote one line from this part: > - Colin: why don't we just publish Tom Phelan's draft as(Continue reading)
RSS Feed