<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 3.2//EN">
<HTML>
<HEAD>
<META HTTP-EQUIV="Content-Type" CONTENT="text/html; charset=iso-8859-1">
<META NAME="Generator" CONTENT="MS Exchange Server version 6.5.7652.24">
<TITLE>RE: [Ndn-interest] Data comes from another face?</TITLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY>
<!-- Converted from text/plain format -->
<P><FONT SIZE=2>Junxiao,<BR>
<BR>
Thank you for responding.<BR>
<BR>
>?Infrastructure WiFi is different: at MAC layer, all communications go through the AP (access point).<BR>
We could take advantage of this property, and install an NDN stack on the AP that aggregates Interests and caches Data.<BR>
<BR>
?You mean we turn a L2 device (access point) into a wireless router?<BR>
<BR>
?<BR>
?>?the AP treats the WiFi link as both a multi-access link where packets can be broadcast to all wireless clients, and one point-to-point link to each wireless link.<BR>
<BR>
Does that make any difference? An ap treat a link as a multiple-access or a point-to-point link. I mean in both cases, the ap does the same thing(transmit one copy of a packet). The only difference would be in L2 addressing?, right? Of course there could be difference if using omnidirectional or unidirectional antennas, which could be a big deal facing mobile nodes. But that's out of computer networking scope.<BR>
<BR>
Thanks,<BR>
Sabet<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
-----Original Message-----<BR>
From: Junxiao Shi [<A HREF="mailto:shijunxiao@email.arizona.edu">mailto:shijunxiao@email.arizona.edu</A>]<BR>
Sent: Thu 6/4/2015 2:19 AM<BR>
To: Muhammad Hosain Abdollahi Sabet<BR>
Cc: ndn-interest@lists.cs.ucla.edu<BR>
Subject: RE: [Ndn-interest] Data comes from another face?<BR>
<BR>
Hi Sabet<BR>
<BR>
Ethernet repeater and UDP multicast group are two examples of multi-access<BR>
links.<BR>
<BR>
Infrastructure WiFi is different: at MAC layer, all communications go<BR>
through the AP (access point).<BR>
We could take advantage of this property, and install an NDN stack on the<BR>
AP that aggregates Interests and caches Data. Under this design, a wireless<BR>
client treats the WiFi link as a point-to-point link to the AP, and the AP<BR>
treats the WiFi link as both a multi-access link where packets can be<BR>
broadcast to all wireless clients, and one point-to-point link to each<BR>
wireless link.<BR>
<BR>
Yours, Junxiao<BR>
On May 31, 2015 2:27 PM, "Muhammad Hosain Abdollahi Sabet" <<BR>
M.AbdollahiSabet@mail.sbu.ac.ir> wrote:<BR>
<BR>
> Junxiao,<BR>
><BR>
> So in wired nets it would be good old BUS or ethernet HUB networks, which<BR>
> is rare these days unless we face lack of switching devices. And in<BR>
> wireless nets, generally all of them are multiple-access link, right?<BR>
><BR>
> Actually It'very good to see you here by chance. Lately I've been thinking<BR>
> on intelligent(self-learning) forwarding and I was counting different<BR>
> situations which it would be useful for. Just a couple of hours ago I saw<BR>
> your presentation about NDN in LANs at NDNComm and I was like :| "Again,<BR>
> I've got here late!", though I had felt the need for such a self-learning<BR>
> mechanism in producer mobility. I don't know if still there is a room to<BR>
> contribute more in this. As far as I already saw, this NFD in addition to a<BR>
> pointer to the chosen output face in PIT, which is available right now,<BR>
> lacks some pointer to the chosen FIB entry itself. And of course some<BR>
> measures are needed to check efficiency of self-learned chosen faces after<BR>
> a while and see if another flooding is needed for choosing possible better<BR>
> face.<BR>
><BR>
> Thanks,<BR>
> Sabet.<BR>
><BR>
><BR>
> -----Original Message-----<BR>
> From: Junxiao Shi [<A HREF="mailto:shijunxiao@email.arizona.edu">mailto:shijunxiao@email.arizona.edu</A><BR>
> <shijunxiao@email.arizona.edu>]<BR>
> Sent: Sun 5/24/2015 1:48 AM<BR>
> To: Muhammad Hosain Abdollahi Sabet<BR>
> Cc: ndn-interest@lists.cs.ucla.edu<BR>
> Subject: Re: [Ndn-interest] Data comes from another face?<BR>
><BR>
> Hi Sabet<BR>
><BR>
> As I understand you question is:<BR>
> In a network of NDN nodes where none of the nodes is using broadcast<BR>
> strategy, if a node has not forwarded an Interest out of an interface, is<BR>
> it possible for this node to receive a Data on this interface?<BR>
><BR>
> The answer is YES.<BR>
> Think about a multi-access link with 3 hosts P Q R.<BR>
><BR>
> 1. Q sends an Interest. P and R receive this Interest,<BR>
> 2. P replies with a Data. Q and R receive this Data.<BR>
><BR>
> In this scenario, R has not forwarded an Interest to the multi-access link,<BR>
> but receives a Data from the multi-access link.<BR>
><BR>
> Yours, Junxiao<BR>
><BR>
> On Wed, May 20, 2015 at 11:17 AM, Muhammad Hosain Abdollahi Sabet <<BR>
> M.AbdollahiSabet@mail.sbu.ac.ir> wrote:<BR>
><BR>
> > Hi,<BR>
> > We all know that data packets follow breadcrumbs which interest packets<BR>
> > leave behind. And we expect to receive data packets from the same face<BR>
> > which interests have already been forwarded to, according to<BR>
> correspondent<BR>
> > fib entries, right? So, when the second sentence won't happen? I mean a<BR>
> > node receive a data packet matching a pit entry, from a face that the<BR>
> > interest has not been forwarded to, according to the fib entry. If a node<BR>
> > choose to broadcast for forwarding strategy, such a situation happens. I<BR>
> > know that. But is there any other condition?<BR>
> ><BR>
> > Thanks,<BR>
> > Sabet<BR>
> ><BR>
><BR>
><BR>
<BR>
<BR>
</FONT>
</P>
</BODY>
</HTML>