Subject: [ppsp] [Draft Notification] Peer Protocol

From: "Y.J. GU" <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 05 Jul 2010 16:20:54 +0800

Hi all,

We have just submitted a new draft about Peer Protocol.  

http://www.ietf.org/id/draft-gu-ppsp-peer-protocol-00.txt. 

We expect your comments and hope we can discuss this draft on the mailing list before f2f meeting. 

Thank you very much.

  _____  

From: [email-masked] [mailto:[email-masked]] On Behalf Of zhangyunfei
Sent: Thursday, July 01, 2010 1:51 PM
To: [email-masked]
Subject: [ppsp] ppsp workshop materials

Hi all,

   The PPSP workshop materilas are avaialable at http://labs.chinamobile.com/focus/PPSP. You can find slides and pictures there.

   If you don't understand Chinese, just scroll to find the PPT topic where the titles of the slides are marked in English.

    Hope these slides are useful for your better understanding of PPSP progress.See you in Maastricht.

BR

Yunfei 

  _____  

zhangyunfei

2010-07-01

---

From: "Xiao, Lin (NSN - CN/Beijing)" <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 19 Jul 2010 16:36:43 +0800

Hi Yingjie,
 
Well done! 
 
I took a quick view of the whole draft and have some questions as
following:
 
1. The draft says Peer locating is also a fundamental part of Peer
Protocol, and the Reload is analyzed as one option. But IMO, details of
how peer is located is out of the scope of PPSP, which should be solve
by Reload, DNS or IP protocols. All the methods should be just options
and which one is used should be indicated by signaling of Peer protocol.
So, the peer locating protocol is just similar with peer transportation
Protocol, PPSP Peer protocol itself dose not describe them in
specification, but just negotiate one to use from multiple existing
protocols. So, I think, we should not define Peer Locating Protocol in
the draft.
 
2. In section 1, it says "bitmap indicating which chunks a peer
possesses", but in Section 4.2.2.3, bitmap is defined as "each bit
represents a particular block of a chunk".I'm confused that whether
bitmap is used to indicate chunks or blocks in a chunk here. Draft
draft-zong-ppsp-reqs
<http://tools.ietf.org/id/draft-zong-ppsp-reqs-04.txt>   makes different
term definitions on bitmap and buffer map to work on those two scenarios
respectively. I think we should keep align between the two drafts on
terms, right?
 
3. Section 4.4 mentions "synchronous downloading/uploading" and
"eliminating or decreasing the influence of Jitter and packet loss".
IMO, both of the requirements are mainly solved by transportation
protocol, but not by Peer protocol itself. And the synchronous
downloading/uploading is not a real-time specific feature at all, which
is a common feature of P2P content applications.
 
4. In section 4.2.1.3.3, it says "to indicate its own property when
request for peer lists". I'm not sure what kind of property you
mentioned here. the following example is also not clear to me. Do you
mean when a peer is a ADSL access node, its candidate remote peers
should also be ADSL nodes?
 
Thanks a lot.

Br
Lin

________________________________

From: [email-masked] [mailto:[email-masked]] On Behalf Of
ext Y.J. GU
Sent: Monday, July 05, 2010 4:21 PM
To: [email-masked]
Subject: [ppsp] [Draft Notification] Peer Protocol

Hi all,

We expect your comments and hope we can discuss this draft on the
mailing list before f2f meeting. 

Thank you very much.

________________________________

From: [email-masked] [mailto:[email-masked]] On Behalf Of
zhangyunfei
Sent: Thursday, July 01, 2010 1:51 PM
To: [email-masked]
Subject: [ppsp] ppsp workshop materials

Hi all,

   The PPSP workshop materilas are avaialable at
http://labs.chinamobile.com/focus/PPSP. You can find slides and pictures
there.

   If you don't understand Chinese, just scroll to find the PPT topic
where the titles of the slides are marked in English.

    Hope these slides are useful for your better understanding of PPSP
progress.See you in Maastricht.

BR

Yunfei 

________________________________

zhangyunfei

2010-07-01

---

From: Ning Zong <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 20 Jul 2010 09:31:39 +0800

Hi, Lin,

See inline.

  _____  

From: [email-masked] [mailto:[email-masked]] On Behalf Of
Xiao, Lin (NSN - CN/Beijing)
Sent: Monday, July 19, 2010 4:37 PM
To: ext Y.J. GU; [email-masked]
Subject: Re: [ppsp] [Draft Notification] Peer Protocol

Hi Yingjie,

Well done! 

I took a quick view of the whole draft and have some questions as following:

1. The draft says Peer locating is also a fundamental part of Peer Protocol,
and the Reload is analyzed as one option. But IMO, details of how peer is
located is out of the scope of PPSP, which should be solve by Reload, DNS or
IP protocols. All the methods should be just options and which one is used
should be indicated by signaling of Peer protocol. So, the peer locating
protocol is just similar with peer transportation Protocol, PPSP Peer
protocol itself dose not describe them in specification, but just negotiate
one to use from multiple existing protocols. So, I think, we should not
define Peer Locating Protocol in the draft.

2. In section 1, it says "bitmap indicating which chunks a peer possesses",
but in Section 4.2.2.3, bitmap is defined as "each bit represents a
particular block of a chunk".I'm confused that whether bitmap is used to
indicate chunks or blocks in a chunk here. Draft
<http://tools.ietf.org/id/draft-zong-ppsp-reqs-04.txt> draft-zong-ppsp-reqs
makes different term definitions on bitmap and buffer map to work on those
two scenarios respectively. I think we should keep align between the two
drafts on terms, right?

[ZONG]: These two terms - bitmap and buffer map should be the same. We can
make one term in requirement draft.

3. Section 4.4 mentions "synchronous downloading/uploading" and "eliminating
or decreasing the influence of Jitter and packet loss". IMO, both of the
requirements are mainly solved by transportation protocol, but not by Peer
protocol itself. And the synchronous downloading/uploading is not a
real-time specific feature at all, which is a common feature of P2P content
applications.

4. In section 4.2.1.3.3, it says "to indicate its own property when request
for peer lists". I'm not sure what kind of property you mentioned here. the
following example is also not clear to me. Do you mean when a peer is a ADSL
access node, its candidate remote peers should also be ADSL nodes?

Thanks a lot.

Br

Lin

  _____  

From: [email-masked] [mailto:[email-masked]] On Behalf Of ext
Y.J. GU
Sent: Monday, July 05, 2010 4:21 PM
To: [email-masked]
Subject: [ppsp] [Draft Notification] Peer Protocol

Hi all,

We expect your comments and hope we can discuss this draft on the mailing
list before f2f meeting. 

Thank you very much.

  _____  

Hi all,

   If you don't understand Chinese, just scroll to find the PPT topic where
the titles of the slides are marked in English.

BR

Yunfei 

  _____  

zhangyunfei

2010-07-01