Hi,
> On Apr 25, 2021, at 11:49 PM, Velt, R. (Ronald) in 't > <[email protected]> wrote: > > Hi Aaron, > I was marveling the news about exploration on Mars this week and this caused > me to wonder if anyone has looked at DTN as a protocol provided by TAPS. My > recollection of DTN is rather rusty and I think it might be an informative > thought experiment for the API. > Funny you should mention that. > > A short while ago I had a thought about a TAPS CLA (Convergence Layer > Adapter, the layer below the Bundle Protocol and above the Transport Layer) > as potentially “one CLA to rule them all”. (It was no more than that: a > passing thought, quickly evaporating). This would be more or less the > complement of your thinking; DTN-over-TAPS instead of DTN as one of the > candidate transports that TAPS might select (if all else fails, presumably). > > Throwing this as bait to the DTN WG, since there could be someone there > interested in either thought experiment. (Not sure how much overlap there is > between both communities). > > --Ronald in ‘t Velt > Sorry for being negative about what clearly is academically-minded brainstorming… I should be open towards such stuff :-) But… aren’t DTN applications special applications, which make implicit assumptions about the network underneath, i.e. they’re written particularly for the use case, because they expect… well, massive delay? I can’t imagine such an application being happy with TAPS swapping in TCP or even QUIC as a replacement… and conversely, going with Aaron’s thought model, I can’t imagine a “normal” application benefiting hugely from DTN? What am I missing in this picture? Cheers, Michael
_______________________________________________ Taps mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/taps
