Subject: [Dime] Cost of duplicate detection

From: "Tolga Asveren" <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 27 Mar 2006 15:30:10 -0500

We faced a few unconveniences while implementing duplicate detection as
defined in RFC3588. A few weeks ago, I asked some questions to have a
feeling how other people feel about duplicate detection in DIME WG. I think
it could be more handy to have a reference when discussing about this issue,
so I prepared a draft:

http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-asveren-dime-ansack-00.txt

It tries to summarize the duplicate detection mechanism -as far as I
underdstand- and describes some extension to the base protocol to make the
whole duplicate detection processing less storage-intensive, but please
consider it just as an example idea.

AFAICS the problems are:
a) Duplicate detection consumes too much memory on the server
b) There is no deterministic/theoretically safe way to decide when to delete
stored data for duplicate detection purposes
c) Improvements based on estimates, e.g. assuming a maximum diameter network
delay, still require considerable amount of memory and require extra
computing, e.g. timestamping etc...

I don't know whether anything can be improved at all, I am just exploring
for now.

    Thanks,
    Tolga

_______________________________________________
DiME mailing list
[email-masked]
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dime

---

From: "Tolga Asveren" <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 29 Mar 2006 11:43:18 -0500

Due to the lack of responses, maybe I should first ask this question:

Is there anybody out there which implemented duplicate detection as defined
in RFC3588?

   Thanks,
   Tolga

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Tolga Asveren [mailto:[email-masked]]
> Sent: Monday, March 27, 2006 3:30 PM
> To: [email-masked]
> Subject: [Dime] Cost of duplicate detection
>
>