[Nfd-dev] about the relation between FIB and feedback from (un)successful interests

[Lixia Zhang]

I'm on the flight to Boston and catching up my notes from yesterday: we spent time on this issue of how to handle the relation between FIB and feedback from (un)successful Interests, and I just want put down my view (at this time) in words, in case I did not express it clearly during the call 

1/ we keep different things separately: FIB state is FIB state, interest feedback is recorded somewhere else (I dont know exactly where it is now)

2/ strategy looks all the info available to it and makes forwarding decisions for future interests

3/ So we just need a clear design of the following:
a) the prefix granularity of the impact from (un)successful interest, and
b) the time scale of this impact (i.e. how long to remember this)

3.a: if we take a "slow-start" spirit, i.e. being conservative until we learn better, a simple way to decide the prefix granularity is just take the name of successful/unsuccessful interest minus last components.
e.g. this makes sense in streaming data (supposedly the last component is sequence number)
for continued success, we dont change the prefix; 
for continued failure: we need to understand what are the shared prefixes between those failed interests to decide whether we want to extract out more components from the end of the prefix.

3.b: maybe we can just follow standard soft state design, i.e. continued use of the information (which prefix succeeds/failed using which face) will rest the timeout, otherwise the information times out and get removed.

Thoughts?

Feel free to share with whoever interested, but I dont think this is ready to go nfd-dev list at this time (Junxiao, I will archive this msg)

Lixia

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://www.lists.cs.ucla.edu/pipermail/nfd-dev/attachments/20191031/cdeacf32/attachment.html>