<html><head><meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html charset=us-ascii"></head><body style="word-wrap: break-word; -webkit-nbsp-mode: space; -webkit-line-break: after-white-space;" class=""><br class=""><div><blockquote type="cite" class=""><div class="">On Jul 7, 2016, at 6:41 AM, Zeinab Zali <<a href="mailto:zeinabzali@gmail.com" class="">zeinabzali@gmail.com</a>> wrote:</div><br class="Apple-interchange-newline"><div class=""><div dir="ltr" class="">Dear all,<div class=""><br class=""></div><div class="">There is a serious question in my mind about NDN architecture and method. Is sending <b class="">an interest for each chunk </b>is efficient? In this way, for a large file lots of interest should be sent with all the security and communication (or even may be routing and forwarding) overhead. How It is justified? Is there a discussion in the literature about it?</div></div></div></blockquote><div><br class=""></div>Dear Zeinab,</div><div><br class=""></div><div>thanks for bringing up the question. I tried to fully understand it before commenting: you asked:</div><div> "Is sending <b class="">an interest for each chunk </b>is efficient?"</div><div>this implies to me that you worry about sending more interest packets than necessary -- is that right?</div><div><br class=""></div><div>If so,</div><div>- keen in mind we are talking about a network layer protocol here (network packet must have a MTU size that prevents a single packet blocking others for too long)</div><div>- one of the many functions that interest-data exchange provides is loss recovery</div><div>- if one sent an interest per big file, wouldn't that make the whole file as the unit of loss recovery? Would that be efficient?</div><div><br class=""></div><div>Lixia</div><div>PS: You must know that a TCP connection also has packets going both directions, for the same purpose. There is no attempt to reduce TCP ack overhead by making TCP Ack to work on a file granularity.</div></body></html>