Pasi Sarolahti | 9 Nov 02:08 2009
Picon
Picon

Note takers and jabber scribe

Hello,

Would anyone like to volunteer in advance for taking notes or  
channelling jabber in the DCCP meeting tomorrow morning? That would be  
greatly appreciated.

Thanks!

- Pasi

Pasi Sarolahti | 11 Nov 04:41 2009
Picon
Picon

DCCP minutes

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)

Leandro Sales | 15 Nov 21:11 2009
Picon

Re: 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 <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)

Gorry Fairhurst | 16 Nov 11:41 2009
Picon
Picon

Re: DCCP minutes


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)

Michael Welzl | 16 Nov 15:53 2009
Picon
Picon

Request for review of MulTFRC

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)

Phelan, Tom | 16 Nov 16:13 2009

Re: DCCP minutes

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)

Leandro Sales | 16 Nov 18:39 2009
Picon

Re: DCCP minutes

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)

Andrew Lentvorski | 16 Nov 22:21 2009

Re: DCCP minutes

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

Pasi Sarolahti | 16 Nov 22:47 2009
Picon
Picon

Re: 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  
> 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

Phelan, Tom | 16 Nov 23:02 2009

Re: DCCP minutes

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)


Gmane