Hi, Lars. In my previous e-mail I was saying that those two scenarios (cycling competition and air-to-ground) involved a single hop, so they should be removed.
So we agree. Thanks, Jose > -----Mensaje original----- > De: Eggert, Lars [mailto:l...@netapp.com] > Enviado el: miércoles, 20 de noviembre de 2013 18:20 > Para: jsald...@unizar.es > CC: tc...@ietf.org; Martin Stiemerling; tsv-area@ietf.org > Asunto: Re: [tcmtf] Improvements in the TCM-TF charter draft v8 > > Hi, > > On 2013-11-20, at 12:15, Jose Saldana <jsald...@unizar.es> wrote: > > - a satellite connection used for providing connectivity in a > > non-connected area during a short period of time (e.g. journalists > > covering the arrival of a mountain stage of a cycling competition). > > where does this scenario have multiple L3 hops involved? The bottleneck link > is the satellite hop. > > > - an air-to-ground connection providing Internet connectivity to the > > passengers of an aircraft, multiplexing a number of simultaneous VoIP > flows. > > Ditto, the bottleneck here is air-to-ground. > > Lars > > > Regarding these other two scenarios, perhaps TCM-TF would only be > > interesting when there is a community network in which packets have to > > traverse a (frequently high) number of hops: > > > > - a wireless Internet connection shared by a number of people in a > > place with low Internet penetration > > - a community network, in which a number of people in the same > > geographical place share their connections in a cooperative way > > > > For example, in this scenario a community network with a high number > > of hops is considered: http://www.guifi.net/en/guifi_zones. There is > > also a paper about the topology of community networks: "On the > > topology characterization of Guifi.net" > > http://ieeexplore.ieee.org/xpls/abs_all.jsp?arnumber=6379103 > > > > Thanks for your feedback! > > > > Jose > > > > -----Mensaje original----- > > De: tcmtf [mailto:tcmtf-boun...@ietf.org] En nombre de Eggert, Lars > > Enviado el: miércoles, 20 de noviembre de 2013 17:20 > > Para: jsald...@unizar.es > > CC: tc...@ietf.org; Martin Stiemerling; tsv-area@ietf.org > > Asunto: Re: [tcmtf] Improvements in the TCM-TF charter draft v8 > > > > Hi, > > > > On 2013-11-20, at 10:24, Jose Saldana <jsald...@unizar.es> wrote: > >> But if you want to use it in more than a single hop, ROHC has to be > >> tunneled, and you lose the savings achieved by compression. So the > >> idea is that a number of packets (multiplexed) share the tunnel overhead. > > > > several of the scenarios you describe for TCM-TF seem to be fully > > addressed by ROHC, i.e., do not seem to have multiple L3 hops that > > require creation of a tunnel. > > > > It would be good to explicitly limit yourself to describing scenarios > > that do have that requirement. > > > > Lars > >
