[Nfd-dev] about draft-irtf-icnrg-IPOC

[Mohammad Ishfaque Jahan Rafee]

Hi,
I read one paper titled "TCP/ICN: Carrying TCP over Content Centric and
Named Data Networks" quite a while ago. This paper made the same argument
as Lixia, with some data to back it up.
Best Regards
Rafee

On Tue, Jul 14, 2020 at 8:22 PM Lixia Zhang <lixia at cs.ucla.edu> wrote:

> Hi Susmit,
>
> thanks a lot for helping out with the specifics regarding the
> motivations and designs behind IPOC internet-draft that we discussed last
> Friday.
> To answer the question you asked at the end about which way I’d like to
> get my comments back to all the authors: my worry about going to ICNRG is
> that I might not be able to keep up with discussions there:(
> (students and I went thru all email about IPOC this time because it’s just
> a one-time obligation)
>
> Wonder if you could help pass the following to your coauthors:
>
> 1/ I strongly suggest to avoid abusing interest packets to carry actual
> payload, IP packets in your design.
>
> a) an interest is meant to retrieve a data packet, that’s why it hangs on
> PIT at every hop until the data packet comes back (or otherwise timeout).
> Buffering lots IP packet in the PIT is *bad*, as it takes space
> and totally useless.  Data packet in CS can be useful even for
> one-one communication: in case the packet lost, retransmitted interest
> will get it from the CS just before the loss point.
>
> b) signed interest is meant to authenticate interest that causes state
> changes, not for payload authentication.
>
> 2/ if one must use NDN to carry IP packets, let’s treat each IP packet as
> a data packet in both directions, instead of just one direction.
>
> You may ask: how to “push” a received IP packet -- may try a combination
> of a few ways:
>
>    - each end could try to fetch *opportunistically*; this could
>    be pretty effective if one can make use of recognized patterns in IP packet
>    arrivals, and the opportunistic fetching interest have a not-too-short
>    lifetime.
>    - in case needed, send a probe interest to trigger the other end
>    sending an interest; this probe interest could have a very short lifetime
>    as it’s not meant to wait for data. This is still a lot better
>    than buffering IP packets in PIT.
>       - Yes there could be a bit delay but look, even in your current
>       design, the IPOC gateway has to wait for Interest form IPOC client already.
>
> The main drawback is doubling packet count, but perhaps not much
> increase on router memory consumption since
> - interest packets are small in size;
> - using real data packets to carry IP packets is probably more economical
> in byte count as compared to abusing interests to carry IP packets.
>
> Doing things in the right way would have a better potential to
> attract others to your work, I believe.
>
> Just my 2 cents,
> Lixia
> _______________________________________________
> Nfd-dev mailing list
> Nfd-dev at lists.cs.ucla.edu
> http://www.lists.cs.ucla.edu/mailman/listinfo/nfd-dev
>


-- 
Best Regards
Rafee
www.mohammadrafee.com
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://www.lists.cs.ucla.edu/pipermail/nfd-dev/attachments/20200714/f8406a49/attachment.html>