Subject: [dtn-interest] Preparing for the DTNRG meeting in Atlanta

From: Joerg Ott <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 15 Oct 2012 17:03:09 +0300

Folks,

we have our agenda slot in Atlanta (Thu, 17:30 - 18:30).

Our priority will be any open discussions of the documents
we are supposed to finish:

draft-irtf-dtnrg-dgram-clayer-00
draft-irtf-dtnrg-tcp-clayer-04
draft-sims-dtnrg-bpmib-02
draft-dtnrg-ltp-cbhe-registries-03

We have received reviews for the first three and we have an
updated document for TCPCL following the review.  We need
minor updates for the DGRAM CL and the MIB.

Please try to provide those updates by the I-D submission deadline
in a week from now.

We intend to spend as much time as necessary to finish those
and submit them for publication right after the IETF.

Please drop us a note for further agenda slot requests if we
have spare time in the end.

Thanks,
Jörg

---

From: "Templin, Fred L" <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 22 Oct 2012 11:23:34 -0700

Hi Jorg,

> -----Original Message-----
> From: [email-masked] [mailto:[email-masked]]
> On Behalf Of Joerg Ott
> Sent: Monday, October 15, 2012 7:03 AM
> To: DTN interest
> Cc: Kevin Fall
> Subject: [dtn-interest] Preparing for the DTNRG meeting in Atlanta
> 
> Folks,
> 

I don't see the DTN session listed on the Atlanta meeting agenda.
Are the above date and time for the DTN meeting slot firm?

Thanks - Fred
[email-masked]

> _______________________________________________
> dtn-interest mailing list
> [email-masked]
> https://www.irtf.org/mailman/listinfo/dtn-interest

---

From: Marc Blanchet <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 22 Oct 2012 14:25:14 -0400

> I don't see the DTN session listed on the Atlanta meeting agenda.

there has been for some time now.

Thrusday 
1730-1830	Afternoon Session III
Salon B	SEC	pkix	 Public-Key Infrastructure (X.509)	
Salon A	OPS	6renum	 IPv6 Site Renumbering	
Salon C	IRTF	dtnrg	 Delay-Tolerant Networking Research Group

Marc.

---

From: "Templin, Fred L" <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 22 Oct 2012 11:30:22 -0700

Thanks Marc,

Fred

From: Marc Blanchet [mailto:[email-masked]]
Sent: Monday, October 22, 2012 11:25 AM
To: Templin, Fred L
Cc: Joerg Ott; DTN interest; Kevin Fall
Subject: Re: [dtn-interest] Preparing for the DTNRG meeting in Atlanta

Hi Jorg,

-----Original Message-----
From: [email-masked]<mailto:[email-masked]> [mailto:[email-masked]]
On Behalf Of Joerg Ott
Sent: Monday, October 15, 2012 7:03 AM
To: DTN interest
Cc: Kevin Fall
Subject: [dtn-interest] Preparing for the DTNRG meeting in Atlanta

Folks,

Thrusday

1730-1830

Afternoon Session III

Salon B<http://tools.ietf.org/agenda/85/venue/?room=salon-b>

SEC

pkix<https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/charter-ietf-pkix/>

 Public-Key Infrastructure (X.509)

Salon A<http://tools.ietf.org/agenda/85/venue/?room=salon-a>

OPS

6renum<https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/charter-ietf-6renum/>

 IPv6 Site Renumbering

Salon C<http://tools.ietf.org/agenda/85/venue/?room=salon-c>

IRTF

dtnrg

 Delay-Tolerant Networking Research Group

Marc.

Thanks - Fred
[email-masked]<mailto:[email-masked]>

Thanks,
Jörg
_______________________________________________
dtn-interest mailing list
[email-masked]<mailto:[email-masked]>
https://www.irtf.org/mailman/listinfo/dtn-interest
_______________________________________________
dtn-interest mailing list
[email-masked]<mailto:[email-masked]>
https://www.irtf.org/mailman/listinfo/dtn-interest

---

From: Joerg Ott <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 23 Oct 2012 07:40:49 +0300

Hi,

I just checked and it seems to be still in the same slot.

Firm -- well, we can never really say.  Usually, quite firm
but last-minute agenda changes do happen.

Jörg

---

From: Paulo Mendes <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 23 Oct 2012 10:48:04 +0100

Dear all

After having submitting version -00 in July we just released version -01 of the dLife routing protocol yesterday.

Major differences are:
- Definition of EID Dictionary and the correspondent TLV
- Redefinition of ACK TLV
- Further specification of Hello procedure and information exchange phases
- Implementation over DTN2 and Bytewalla DTN devices (November - start of the evaluation process)
- Creation of a Bluetooth convergence layer.

Although this item will not be discussed in Atlanta I would like to raise oflline discussion to:
- Have the draft approved as DTNRG draft
- Understand if there is still interest from the DTNRG to draft a generic routing framework that would be used by any routing protocol. 

I would appreciate some feedback on this matter in order to organize our work until the Orlando meeting in March 2013, where we plan to submit another version of dLife, already with a full implementation and test-bed evaluation.

*IF* there is still interest in drafting a generic routing framework (which makes all the sense IMO), we are available to contribute to have version -00 read for Orlando.. This in case we would release the first DTNRG version of dLife already derived from the generic routing framework.

Info about dLife version 01:

Filename:	 draft-moreira-dlife
Revision:	 01
Title:		 Opportunistic Routing based on Users Daily Life Routine
Creation date:	 2012-10-22
WG ID:		 Individual Submission
Number of pages: 52
URL:             http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-moreira-dlife-01.txt
Status:          http://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-moreira-dlife
Htmlized:        http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-moreira-dlife-01
Diff:            http://www.ietf.org/rfcdiff?url2=draft-moreira-dlife-01

Abstract:
  This document is written in the context of the Delay Tolerant
  Networking Research Group and will be presented for reviewing by that
  group. This document defines dLife, an opportunistic routing protocol
  that takes advantage of time-evolving social structures. dLife
  belongs to the family of social-aware opportunistic routing protocols
  for intermittently connected networks. dLife operates based on a
  representation of the dynamics of social structures as a weighted
  contact graph, where the weights (i.e., social strengths) express how
  long a pair of nodes is in contact over different period of times. It
  considers two complementary utility functions: Time-Evolving Contact
  Duration (TECD) that captures the evolution of social interaction
  among pairs of users in the same daily period of time, over
  consecutive days; and TECD Importance (TECDi) that captures the
  evolution of user's importance, based on its node degree and the
  social strength towards its neighbors, in different periods of time.
  It is intended for use in wireless networks where there is no
  guarantee that a fully connected path between any source -
  destination pair exists at any time, a scenario where traditional
  routing protocols are unable to deliver bundles. Such networks can be
  sparse mesh, in which case intermittent connectivity is due to lack
  of physical connections, or dense mesh, in which case intermittent
  connectivity may be due to high interference or shadowing. In any
  case, intermittent connectivity can also be due to the availability
  of devices (e.g., unavailable due to power saving rules). The
  document presents an architectural overview followed by the protocol
  specification.

Cheers
Paulo 

> have spare time in the end.

-------------------------------------------------------------
Paulo Mendes, Ph.D
Scientific Director for Innovation of the Research Unit in Informatics Systems and Technologies (SITI)
Director of the Ph.D program on Informatics - New Media and Pervasive Systems (NEMPS)
Secretary of the ACM SIGCOMM Chapter - Portugal
University Lusofona, Portugal
[email-masked]
http://siti.ulusofona.pt/~pmendes
Tel.: 217 515 500 Fax: 21 757 7006

---

From: Anders Lindgren <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 23 Oct 2012 12:37:22 +0200

Hi Paolo,

I for one fully support taking on dLife as a DTNRG draft, and I look
forward to working together with you to try to get it through the
whole process a bit quicker than what was the case for PRoPHET. :)

I also still think that creating a common routing framework as
discussed before would be very beneficial, and I believe that Elwyn
and Avri are also still interested in this. I've been very busy with
other projects since the Mountain View meeting, but your timeplan of
having a -00 version of such a framework ready for the March meeting
seems very reasonable, so let's work towards that.

/Anders

On Tue, Oct 23, 2012 at 11:48 AM, Paulo Mendes
<[email-masked]> wrote:
> - Understand if there is still interest from the DTNRG to draft a generic
> routing framework that would be used by any routing protocol.
>
> I would appreciate some feedback on this matter in order to organize our
> work until the Orlando meeting in March 2013, where we plan to submit
> another version of dLife, already with a full implementation and test-bed
> evaluation.
>
> *IF* there is still interest in drafting a generic routing framework (which
> makes all the sense IMO), we are available to contribute to have version -00
> read for Orlando.. This in case we would release the first DTNRG version of
> dLife already derived from the generic routing framework.
>
>
> URL:
> http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-moreira-dlife-01.txt

---

From: "HUANG, CHIN-TSER" <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 24 Oct 2012 15:08:39 +0000

Hi,

Unfortunately due to my teaching schedule I cannot attend this DTNRG meeting. Will the minutes of the meeting be posted online?

Best,
Chin-Tser

-----Original Message-----
From: [email-masked] [mailto:[email-masked]] On Behalf Of Joerg Ott
Sent: Tuesday, October 23, 2012 12:41 AM
To: Templin, Fred L
Cc: Kevin Fall; DTN interest
Subject: Re: [dtn-interest] Preparing for the DTNRG meeting in Atlanta

Hi,

Firm -- well, we can never really say.  Usually, quite firm but last-minute agenda changes do happen.

Jörg

On 22.10.2012 21:23, Templin, Fred L wrote:
>> Our priority will be any open discussions of the documents we are 
>> supposed to finish:
>>
>> We have received reviews for the first three and we have an updated 
>> document for TCPCL following the review.  We need minor updates for 
>> the DGRAM CL and the MIB.
>>
>> Please try to provide those updates by the I-D submission deadline in 
>> a week from now.
>>
>> We intend to spend as much time as necessary to finish those and 
>> submit them for publication right after the IETF.
>>
>> Please drop us a note for further agenda slot requests if we have 
>> spare time in the end.
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Jörg