ietf
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [dtn-interest] DTNWG proposal is a terribly bad idea

2014-07-22 23:33:33
Lloyd,

a number of things have evolved with the Bundle protocol since 2008. Among
them, the ones resulting from direct experience with live testing strike me
as the most valuable.

v



On Tue, Jul 22, 2014 at 10:21 PM, <l(_dot_)wood(_at_)surrey(_dot_)ac(_dot_)uk> 
wrote:

 Vint,


 not participating in the DTN effort was a suggestion you made when we

discussed the Bundle Protocol while walking around the golf course at

IETF Dublin in July 2008, after I raised concerns about the Bundle

Protocol work being rushed and not being technically sufficient.


 Since that conversation, we have done the first in-space tests of bundle
use

from the UK-DMC satellite, we wrote the "A Bundle of Problems" paper that

has belatedly been recognised as identifying problems with the Bundle

Protocol... Those and other contributions would simply not have

happened had I followed your suggestion then.


 In hindsight, do you think that was a good suggestion?


  Lloyd Wood
http://sat-net.com/L.Wood/dtn
  ------------------------------
*From:* Vint Cerf <vint(_at_)google(_dot_)com>
*Sent:* Saturday, 19 July 2014 10:29 PM
*To:* Wood L Dr (Electronic Eng)
*Cc:* dtn(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org; dtn-interest; IAB IAB; IETF-Discussion list; 
IESG

*Subject:* Re: [dtn-interest] DTNWG proposal is a terribly bad idea

 ok, you don't need to participate in the WG if it is formed, Lloyd.

 vint



On Fri, Jul 18, 2014 at 11:28 PM, 
<l(_dot_)wood(_at_)surrey(_dot_)ac(_dot_)uk> wrote:

I'm not going to be attending the DTNWG BOF remotely, as it's
at 2am my local time - but I'd just like to point out, as I said in

http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/dtn/current/msg00026.html
http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/dtn/current/msg00054.html

that I think that having an IETF workgroup push the technically
flawed Bundle Protocol through on standards track, after years
of poor development and unfixed problems across two IRTF research
groups, is a really terribly bad idea that does not benefit the IETF
community, and does not benefit work on delay-tolerant networking
or ad-hoc networking in general.

So, I am not in favour of the proposed DTNWG being formed.

Enjoy Toronto.

Lloyd Wood
http://sat-net.com/L.Wood/dtn
_______________________________________________
dtn-interest mailing list
dtn-interest(_at_)irtf(_dot_)org
https://www.irtf.org/mailman/listinfo/dtn-interest