[Nfd-dev] review request: NDNLPv2 NACK, Fragmentation, LocalControlHeader

[Ilya Moiseenko]

Hi Junxiao,
I think that even the reliability is not yet approved you should rename it to “partial reliability” throughout the spec, because I guess that you are not going to provide persistent retransmissions on the link layer.

Another thing is NACK. Ok, if I’m a server-side application getting lots of Interests that I cannot process, do I provide a GiveUpNack to my local NFD ? I expected something like a CongestionNACK. Or congestion goes to the reason field?

Final question, is there a way to make Interest NACK from the application today or in near future? It’s alright if NFD doesn’t understand it yet.

Ilya

On May 25, 2015, at 9:23 PM, Junxiao Shi <shijunxiao at email.arizona.edu> wrote:

> Dear folks
> 
> I have written the protocol spec of first batch of features in NDNLPv2, and I need someone to review the design.
> 
> http://redmine.named-data.net/projects/nfd/wiki/NDNLPv2
> 
> If you don't know what this is about, see #2520, #2763, and http://redmine.named-data.net/attachments/download/301/NDNLPv2_20150417.pptx
> 
> I'll appreciate all review comments.
> You don't have to be an expert in order to do a design review.
> 
> Yours, Junxiao
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Nfd-dev mailing list
> Nfd-dev at lists.cs.ucla.edu
> http://www.lists.cs.ucla.edu/mailman/listinfo/nfd-dev

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://www.lists.cs.ucla.edu/pipermail/nfd-dev/attachments/20150526/d0f5c868/attachment.html>