From sam-bounces@irtf.org Thu Feb 15 06:33:02 2007 Received: from [127.0.0.1] (helo=stiedprmman1.va.neustar.com) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1HHer1-0005Zg-UL; Thu, 15 Feb 2007 06:32:47 -0500 Received: from [10.91.34.44] (helo=ietf-mx.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1HHer1-0005ZX-Dj for sam@irtf.org; Thu, 15 Feb 2007 06:32:47 -0500 Received: from mail1.nagoya-u.jp ([133.6.1.41]) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1HHeqz-0006w3-Gm for sam@irtf.org; Thu, 15 Feb 2007 06:32:47 -0500 Received: from [192.168.203.117] (unknown [133.6.33.137]) by mail1.nagoya-u.jp (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8C0398009B; Thu, 15 Feb 2007 20:32:21 +0900 (JST) Message-ID: <45D444CC.3010505@nagoya-u.jp> Date: Thu, 15 Feb 2007 20:32:28 +0900 From: Nobuo Kawaguchi Organization: Nagoya University User-Agent: Thunderbird 1.5.0.9 (Windows/20061207) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: sam@irtf.org Subject: Re: [SAM] SAM RG interim meeting results References: <4ce32a820701121512i7e1582dds4f4400ec818c4208@mail.gmail.com> <4ce32a820701291131u659faa48r665e8dba5caa2c7c@mail.gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <4ce32a820701291131u659faa48r665e8dba5caa2c7c@mail.gmail.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Scan-Signature: f2984bf50fb52a9e56055f779793d783 Cc: X-BeenThere: sam@irtf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: "For use by members of the Scalable Adaptive Multicast \(SAM\) RG" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: sam-bounces@irtf.org Dear SAM-RG members, In the last P2PM07 workshop, I had a demonstration about overlay network on PlanetLab with MyPLC. The presentation material is http://www.samrg.org/p2pm07/presentations/XcastOnPlanetLab20070111.pdf We are currently planning to open our demonstration softwares. By using our softwares, one can utilize UML on PlanetLab and connect UML nodes using UDP tunnel. Our "orbit" software can manage the configuration of all UDP tunnels from a single conf file. In the UML node, one can run any Linux binary using usual ethernet interfaces over virtual links. In our demonstration, we modified UML kernel to use XCAST6(eXplicit Multi-Unicast) so that we can show xcast routing over UML nodes. Is there any person who are interested to use our software? We are willing to write a document for interested persons. I think, for SAM-RG, PlanetLab is one of the candidate to test the overlay networks(routing protocols) for real environment. Our UML trial can regarded as a start point. We are also planning to write "Internet-Draft" about our overlay configuration. If you have any suggestion about I-D or our softwares, please let me know. Best regards, Nobuo Kawaguchi -- Nagoya Univ. John Buford wrote: > Presentations and meeting notes for the Jan 11 interim SAM RG meeting > are available here: > > http://www.samrg.org/about/meetings/meetings.html > (not all slides are available yet, they will be uploaded as they > become available) > > Presentations made at the P2PM07 workshop are available here: > http://www.samrg.org/p2pm07/program.html > > (not all slides are available yet, they will be uploaded as they become > available) > > We are currently planning to hold an RG meeting at IEFT 69 (Chicago). > > Minutes from the meeting follow. > > =============================================================== > > > Meeting Notes > Scalable Adaptive Multicast RG > Interim Meeting Jan 11, 2007. > > 1. John Buford (Panasonic) > > Overview of problem statement draft > and the existing technologies available > (ALM, Overlay multicast, Proxied overlay > multicast, tunneling with native multicast > islands). > An example architecture and some > operational scenarios. > > 1. Jeremy Mineweaser (MIT Lincoln Labs) > > Adaptativity depends on suitable metrics > and ability to collect these metrics in > real-time and feedback to the network. > > > Discussion: > > KA: Do you think adaptive approach is too complex to be worth the benefit? > JM: remains to be seen > KA: We don't really have a one-size-fits-all protocol > > 2. Mark Pullen (GMU) > > Unlike commercial ISPs,DoD ISPs have an incentive > to use multicast to reduce congestion. > But universal deployment in GIG may not work any better > than in commercial sector. > Gaming community can use multicast in different ways > than DoD since they don't require the real-world fidelity. > > In battlefield, reliability and robustness may not be > fully achievable. > > We at GMU have a prototype to manage multicast using > web services in cooperation with Naval Post-Graduate school. > > There is a need for a framework to interoperate > different mechanisms, a pervasive interoperability should be targeted. > Need the pieces to interoperate in order to mix and match technologies. > Would like to see a standardized tunneling mechanism as well. > Could use the framework for "relative" QoS not absolute QoS. > Relative QoS is important for military applications. > > 3. Keith Ross (Polytechnic) > > P2P Multicast is an IPTV case study > There are several success stories: PPLive, Coolstream, ppstream > 200K users at 400-800 kbps for Chinese New Years > > What are the challenges? > - Bandwidth intensive > - peers dynamic > - asymetric residential access > - incentives for redistribution > - lags among viewers > - security (pollution, overtaking for DDoS) > > Comparison of two Architectures > - Push, tree-based designs, eg. ESM from CMU > - Pull, meshed based designs > Inspired from BiTorrent > But with live streaming > More successful than ESM > > Overview of pull-mesh > Locate other peers watching same channel > Establish TCP connection > Ask neighbors what chunks they have > Request and receive chunks > Start media player > Upload chunks to others > > Presents some measurements of download > vs upload rate for different users > > Popular and unpopular channels > Pull-mesh / IPTV is killer application for multicast > > JM: what are limitations? > KR: free-riding problem, susceptibility to pollution attack > Audience: what is the performance comparison between pull and push > KR: coolstreaming paper has analysis that shows the ESM > is not good under churn > JB: what about licensed content? > KR: yes, content provides can see this as another distribution channel > > > 4. Kurt Tutschku (U. Wuerzburg) > > Challenges on scalable multicast in overlay with mobile networks > There are several challenges due to mobile nodes in an overlay > which translate to problems with overlay multicast with mobile > nodes > These problems relate to roaming in the native network, > node performance capability, variation in network connectivity etc. > > > 5. Wenjun Zeng (U. Missouri) > > Do you plan to consider reliability, congestion control, > etc., in the design? > Pull vs push is an important distinction, as made by Keith > Is there a hybrid of pull vs push? > E.g., tree-bone based approach > > 6. General Discussion > > What about data aggregation for sensor > data collection (ad hoc wireless networks), > is there a multicast solution for this case, > and how does it fit? > > The benefits of an overlay approach for launching SAM framework: > Overlays provide a number of interesting functions including > search, indexing, relaying, topology characterization, measurement. > Integrating awareness of native multicast in to the overlay is > another function like these others that a specific overlay can > chose to use or not depending on application requirements. > > Solutions to the problems of overlays in terms of reliability > and security can be used for multicast reliability and security > perhaps. > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > _______________________________________________ > SAM mailing list > SAM@irtf.org > https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sam _______________________________________________ SAM mailing list SAM@irtf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sam From sam-bounces@irtf.org Thu Feb 15 09:15:07 2007 Received: from [127.0.0.1] (helo=stiedprmman1.va.neustar.com) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1HHhNj-0001l0-8F; Thu, 15 Feb 2007 09:14:43 -0500 Received: from [10.91.34.44] (helo=ietf-mx.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1HHhNh-0001jz-QX for sam@irtf.org; Thu, 15 Feb 2007 09:14:41 -0500 Received: from smtp.mei.co.jp ([133.183.129.25]) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1HHhKB-0003EC-VS for sam@irtf.org; Thu, 15 Feb 2007 09:11:07 -0500 Received: from mail-gw.jp.panasonic.com (dodgers.mei.co.jp [157.8.1.150]) by smtp.mei.co.jp (8.12.11.20060614/3.7W/jazz) with ESMTP id l1FEAqfs004830; Thu, 15 Feb 2007 23:10:52 +0900 (JST) Received: by mail-gw.jp.panasonic.com (8.11.6p2/3.7W/somlx1) with ESMTP id l1FEAtH03786; Thu, 15 Feb 2007 23:10:55 +0900 (JST) Received: from epochmail.jp.panasonic.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.jp.panasonic.com (8.11.6p2/3.7W/astros) with ESMTP id l1FEAs119610; Thu, 15 Feb 2007 23:10:54 +0900 (JST) Received: by epochmail.jp.panasonic.com (8.12.11.20060308/3.7W/soml24) id l1FEArPa007271; Thu, 15 Feb 2007 23:10:53 +0900 (JST) Received: from donau.mrit.mei.co.jp by soml24.jp.panasonic.com (8.12.11.20060308/3.7W) with ESMTP id l1FEAqbb007253; Thu, 15 Feb 2007 23:10:52 +0900 (JST) Message-Id: <200702151410.AA09036@maruta.jp.panasonic.com> From: Eiichi Muramoto Date: Thu, 15 Feb 2007 23:10:45 +0900 To: Nobuo Kawaguchi Subject: Re: [SAM] SAM RG interim meeting results In-Reply-To: <45D444CC.3010505@nagoya-u.jp> References: <45D444CC.3010505@nagoya-u.jp> MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: AL-Mail32 Version 1.13 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Spam-Score: 0.1 (/) X-Scan-Signature: a4a24b484706be629f915bfb1a3e4771 Cc: sam@irtf.org X-BeenThere: sam@irtf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: "For use by members of the Scalable Adaptive Multicast \(SAM\) RG" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: sam-bounces@irtf.org Hello, I think that the test bed where overlay was used is profitable for researchers ( experimenters). The experimenter can construct his experiment network on Planetlab momentarily, can bigin the "user- opt-in" experiment freely, and it is possible to stop it safly. For example, we xcast person can construct IPv6 routing plane on to the planetlab using the "orbit" tunnel(IPv6 over IPv4) and settle l2tp servers on the slice of planetlab for the users. and begin the xcast routing experiment. Some might think he want to experiment on his hybrid solution of ALM and IP multicast. He probably make a multicast enable network and settle a ALM-IP multicast-bridge. Testbed sometimes accelerates the research works. I think we can discuss about it in this RG. Do you agree? Any comment? Best Regards, Eiichi Muramoto. Nobuo Kawaguchi wrote: >Dear SAM-RG members, > >In the last P2PM07 workshop, I had a demonstration >about overlay network on PlanetLab with MyPLC. >The presentation material is >http://www.samrg.org/p2pm07/presentations/XcastOnPlanetLab20070111.pdf > >We are currently planning to open our demonstration softwares. >By using our softwares, one can utilize UML on PlanetLab and >connect UML nodes using UDP tunnel. Our "orbit" software can manage the >configuration of all UDP tunnels from a single conf file. >In the UML node, one can run any Linux binary using usual ethernet >interfaces over virtual links. >In our demonstration, we modified UML kernel to use >XCAST6(eXplicit Multi-Unicast) so that we can show xcast routing >over UML nodes. > >Is there any person who are interested to use our software? >We are willing to write a document for interested persons. > >I think, for SAM-RG, PlanetLab is one of the candidate to test the >overlay networks(routing protocols) for real environment. >Our UML trial can regarded as a start point. >We are also planning to write "Internet-Draft" about our overlay >configuration. > >If you have any suggestion about I-D or our softwares, >please let me know. > >Best regards, >Nobuo Kawaguchi >-- >Nagoya Univ. > > >John Buford wrote: >> Presentations and meeting notes for the Jan 11 interim SAM RG meeting >> are available here: >> >> http://www.samrg.org/about/meetings/meetings.html >> (not all slides are available yet, they will be uploaded as they >> become available) >> >> Presentations made at the P2PM07 workshop are available here: >> http://www.samrg.org/p2pm07/program.html >> >> (not all slides are available yet, they will be uploaded as they become >> available) >> >> We are currently planning to hold an RG meeting at IEFT 69 (Chicago). >> >> Minutes from the meeting follow. >> >> =============================================================== >> >> >> Meeting Notes >> Scalable Adaptive Multicast RG >> Interim Meeting Jan 11, 2007. >> >> 1. John Buford (Panasonic) >> >> Overview of problem statement draft >> and the existing technologies available >> (ALM, Overlay multicast, Proxied overlay >> multicast, tunneling with native multicast >> islands). >> An example architecture and some >> operational scenarios. >> >> 1. Jeremy Mineweaser (MIT Lincoln Labs) >> >> Adaptativity depends on suitable metrics >> and ability to collect these metrics in >> real-time and feedback to the network. >> >> >> Discussion: >> >> KA: Do you think adaptive approach is too complex to be worth the benefit? >> JM: remains to be seen >> KA: We don't really have a one-size-fits-all protocol >> >> 2. Mark Pullen (GMU) >> >> Unlike commercial ISPs,DoD ISPs have an incentive >> to use multicast to reduce congestion. >> But universal deployment in GIG may not work any better >> than in commercial sector. >> Gaming community can use multicast in different ways >> than DoD since they don't require the real-world fidelity. >> >> In battlefield, reliability and robustness may not be >> fully achievable. >> >> We at GMU have a prototype to manage multicast using >> web services in cooperation with Naval Post-Graduate school. >> >> There is a need for a framework to interoperate >> different mechanisms, a pervasive interoperability should be targeted. >> Need the pieces to interoperate in order to mix and match technologies. >> Would like to see a standardized tunneling mechanism as well. >> Could use the framework for "relative" QoS not absolute QoS. >> Relative QoS is important for military applications. >> >> 3. Keith Ross (Polytechnic) >> >> P2P Multicast is an IPTV case study >> There are several success stories: PPLive, Coolstream, ppstream >> 200K users at 400-800 kbps for Chinese New Years >> >> What are the challenges? >> - Bandwidth intensive >> - peers dynamic >> - asymetric residential access >> - incentives for redistribution >> - lags among viewers >> - security (pollution, overtaking for DDoS) >> >> Comparison of two Architectures >> - Push, tree-based designs, eg. ESM from CMU >> - Pull, meshed based designs >> Inspired from BiTorrent >> But with live streaming >> More successful than ESM >> >> Overview of pull-mesh >> Locate other peers watching same channel >> Establish TCP connection >> Ask neighbors what chunks they have >> Request and receive chunks >> Start media player >> Upload chunks to others >> >> Presents some measurements of download >> vs upload rate for different users >> >> Popular and unpopular channels >> Pull-mesh / IPTV is killer application for multicast >> >> JM: what are limitations? >> KR: free-riding problem, susceptibility to pollution attack >> Audience: what is the performance comparison between pull and push >> KR: coolstreaming paper has analysis that shows the ESM >> is not good under churn >> JB: what about licensed content? >> KR: yes, content provides can see this as another distribution channel >> >> >> 4. Kurt Tutschku (U. Wuerzburg) >> >> Challenges on scalable multicast in overlay with mobile networks >> There are several challenges due to mobile nodes in an overlay >> which translate to problems with overlay multicast with mobile >> nodes >> These problems relate to roaming in the native network, >> node performance capability, variation in network connectivity etc. >> >> >> 5. Wenjun Zeng (U. Missouri) >> >> Do you plan to consider reliability, congestion control, >> etc., in the design? >> Pull vs push is an important distinction, as made by Keith >> Is there a hybrid of pull vs push? >> E.g., tree-bone based approach >> >> 6. General Discussion >> >> What about data aggregation for sensor >> data collection (ad hoc wireless networks), >> is there a multicast solution for this case, >> and how does it fit? >> >> The benefits of an overlay approach for launching SAM framework: >> Overlays provide a number of interesting functions including >> search, indexing, relaying, topology characterization, measurement. >> Integrating awareness of native multicast in to the overlay is >> another function like these others that a specific overlay can >> chose to use or not depending on application requirements. >> >> Solutions to the problems of overlays in terms of reliability >> and security can be used for multicast reliability and security >> perhaps. >> >> >> ------------------------------------------------------------------------ >> >> _______________________________________________ >> SAM mailing list >> SAM@irtf.org >> https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sam > > >_______________________________________________ >SAM mailing list >SAM@irtf.org >https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sam ----- muramoto.eiichi@jp.panasonic.com _______________________________________________ SAM mailing list SAM@irtf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sam From sam-bounces@irtf.org Fri Feb 16 08:14:04 2007 Received: from [127.0.0.1] (helo=stiedprmman1.va.neustar.com) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1HI2uJ-0002L0-G5; Fri, 16 Feb 2007 08:13:47 -0500 Received: from [10.91.34.44] (helo=ietf-mx.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1HI2uI-0002Iu-9x for sam@irtf.org; Fri, 16 Feb 2007 08:13:46 -0500 Received: from [134.76.26.176] (helo=vsmtpgwdexc.exc.top.gwdg.de) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1HI2uE-0008MK-6z for sam@irtf.org; Fri, 16 Feb 2007 08:13:46 -0500 Received: from [172.22.0.22] ([134.76.81.25]) by vsmtpgwdexc.exc.top.gwdg.de over TLS secured channel with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.1830); Fri, 16 Feb 2007 14:13:32 +0100 Message-ID: <45D5ADA6.5040204@informatik.uni-goettingen.de> Date: Fri, 16 Feb 2007 14:12:06 +0100 From: Jun Lei User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird 0.8 (Windows/20040913) X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Eiichi Muramoto , sam@irtf.org Subject: Re: [SAM] SAM RG interim meeting results References: <45D444CC.3010505@nagoya-u.jp> <200702151410.AA09036@maruta.jp.panasonic.com> In-Reply-To: <200702151410.AA09036@maruta.jp.panasonic.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-OriginalArrivalTime: 16 Feb 2007 13:13:32.0838 (UTC) FILETIME=[42270460:01C751CC] X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Scan-Signature: 681e62a2ce9b0804b459fe780d892beb Cc: X-BeenThere: sam@irtf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list Reply-To: sam@irtf.org List-Id: "For use by members of the Scalable Adaptive Multicast \(SAM\) RG" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: sam-bounces@irtf.org Dear Eiichi, thanks for your message. We are interested in working over PlanetLab. And I agree with you that PlanetLab can be regarded as one of the most promising candidates to test the overlay networks(routing protocols) under the real environment. Could you please show me some detailed description of your software? I would like to take a look at it. Thank you anyway Jun > Hello, > > I think that the test bed where overlay was used is profitable for > researchers ( experimenters). The experimenter can construct his > experiment network on Planetlab momentarily, can bigin the "user- > opt-in" experiment freely, and it is possible to stop it safly. > > For example, we xcast person can construct IPv6 routing plane > on to the planetlab using the "orbit" tunnel(IPv6 over IPv4) > and settle l2tp servers on the slice of planetlab for the users. > and begin the xcast routing experiment. > > Some might think he want to experiment on his hybrid solution > of ALM and IP multicast. He probably make a multicast enable network > and settle a ALM-IP multicast-bridge. > > Testbed sometimes accelerates the research works. > > I think we can discuss about it in this RG. > Do you agree? Any comment? > > Best Regards, > Eiichi Muramoto. > > > Nobuo Kawaguchi wrote: > >>Dear SAM-RG members, >> >>In the last P2PM07 workshop, I had a demonstration >>about overlay network on PlanetLab with MyPLC. >>The presentation material is >>http://www.samrg.org/p2pm07/presentations/XcastOnPlanetLab20070111.pdf >> >>We are currently planning to open our demonstration softwares. >>By using our softwares, one can utilize UML on PlanetLab and >>connect UML nodes using UDP tunnel. Our "orbit" software can manage the >>configuration of all UDP tunnels from a single conf file. >>In the UML node, one can run any Linux binary using usual ethernet >>interfaces over virtual links. >>In our demonstration, we modified UML kernel to use >>XCAST6(eXplicit Multi-Unicast) so that we can show xcast routing >>over UML nodes. >> >>Is there any person who are interested to use our software? >>We are willing to write a document for interested persons. >> >>I think, for SAM-RG, PlanetLab is one of the candidate to test the >>overlay networks(routing protocols) for real environment. >>Our UML trial can regarded as a start point. >>We are also planning to write "Internet-Draft" about our overlay >>configuration. >> >>If you have any suggestion about I-D or our softwares, >>please let me know. >> >>Best regards, >>Nobuo Kawaguchi >>-- >>Nagoya Univ. >> >> >>John Buford wrote: >> >>>Presentations and meeting notes for the Jan 11 interim SAM RG meeting >>>are available here: >>> >>>http://www.samrg.org/about/meetings/meetings.html >>>(not all slides are available yet, they will be uploaded as they >>>become available) >>> >>>Presentations made at the P2PM07 workshop are available here: >>>http://www.samrg.org/p2pm07/program.html >>> >>>(not all slides are available yet, they will be uploaded as they become >>>available) >>> >>>We are currently planning to hold an RG meeting at IEFT 69 (Chicago). >>> >>>Minutes from the meeting follow. >>> >>>=============================================================== >>> >>> >>>Meeting Notes >>>Scalable Adaptive Multicast RG >>>Interim Meeting Jan 11, 2007. >>> >>>1. John Buford (Panasonic) >>> >>>Overview of problem statement draft >>>and the existing technologies available >>>(ALM, Overlay multicast, Proxied overlay >>>multicast, tunneling with native multicast >>>islands). >>>An example architecture and some >>>operational scenarios. >>> >>>1. Jeremy Mineweaser (MIT Lincoln Labs) >>> >>>Adaptativity depends on suitable metrics >>>and ability to collect these metrics in >>>real-time and feedback to the network. >>> >>> >>>Discussion: >>> >>>KA: Do you think adaptive approach is too complex to be worth the benefit? >>>JM: remains to be seen >>>KA: We don't really have a one-size-fits-all protocol >>> >>>2. Mark Pullen (GMU) >>> >>>Unlike commercial ISPs,DoD ISPs have an incentive >>>to use multicast to reduce congestion. >>>But universal deployment in GIG may not work any better >>>than in commercial sector. >>>Gaming community can use multicast in different ways >>>than DoD since they don't require the real-world fidelity. >>> >>>In battlefield, reliability and robustness may not be >>>fully achievable. >>> >>>We at GMU have a prototype to manage multicast using >>>web services in cooperation with Naval Post-Graduate school. >>> >>>There is a need for a framework to interoperate >>>different mechanisms, a pervasive interoperability should be targeted. >>>Need the pieces to interoperate in order to mix and match technologies. >>>Would like to see a standardized tunneling mechanism as well. >>>Could use the framework for "relative" QoS not absolute QoS. >>>Relative QoS is important for military applications. >>> >>>3. Keith Ross (Polytechnic) >>> >>>P2P Multicast is an IPTV case study >>>There are several success stories: PPLive, Coolstream, ppstream >>>200K users at 400-800 kbps for Chinese New Years >>> >>>What are the challenges? >>>- Bandwidth intensive >>>- peers dynamic >>>- asymetric residential access >>>- incentives for redistribution >>>- lags among viewers >>>- security (pollution, overtaking for DDoS) >>> >>>Comparison of two Architectures >>>- Push, tree-based designs, eg. ESM from CMU >>>- Pull, meshed based designs >>> Inspired from BiTorrent >>> But with live streaming >>> More successful than ESM >>> >>>Overview of pull-mesh >>>Locate other peers watching same channel >>>Establish TCP connection >>>Ask neighbors what chunks they have >>>Request and receive chunks >>>Start media player >>>Upload chunks to others >>> >>>Presents some measurements of download >>>vs upload rate for different users >>> >>>Popular and unpopular channels >>>Pull-mesh / IPTV is killer application for multicast >>> >>>JM: what are limitations? >>>KR: free-riding problem, susceptibility to pollution attack >>>Audience: what is the performance comparison between pull and push >>>KR: coolstreaming paper has analysis that shows the ESM >>> is not good under churn >>>JB: what about licensed content? >>>KR: yes, content provides can see this as another distribution channel >>> >>> >>>4. Kurt Tutschku (U. Wuerzburg) >>> >>>Challenges on scalable multicast in overlay with mobile networks >>>There are several challenges due to mobile nodes in an overlay >>> which translate to problems with overlay multicast with mobile >>> nodes >>>These problems relate to roaming in the native network, >>>node performance capability, variation in network connectivity etc. >>> >>> >>>5. Wenjun Zeng (U. Missouri) >>> >>>Do you plan to consider reliability, congestion control, >>> etc., in the design? >>>Pull vs push is an important distinction, as made by Keith >>>Is there a hybrid of pull vs push? >>>E.g., tree-bone based approach >>> >>>6. General Discussion >>> >>>What about data aggregation for sensor >>>data collection (ad hoc wireless networks), >>>is there a multicast solution for this case, >>>and how does it fit? >>> >>>The benefits of an overlay approach for launching SAM framework: >>>Overlays provide a number of interesting functions including >>>search, indexing, relaying, topology characterization, measurement. >>>Integrating awareness of native multicast in to the overlay is >>>another function like these others that a specific overlay can >>>chose to use or not depending on application requirements. >>> >>>Solutions to the problems of overlays in terms of reliability >>>and security can be used for multicast reliability and security >>>perhaps. >>> >>> >>>------------------------------------------------------------------------ >>> >>>_______________________________________________ >>>SAM mailing list >>>SAM@irtf.org >>>https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sam >> >> >>_______________________________________________ >>SAM mailing list >>SAM@irtf.org >>https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sam > > > ----- > muramoto.eiichi@jp.panasonic.com > > _______________________________________________ > SAM mailing list > SAM@irtf.org > https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sam -- Jun Lei PhD Student Address: Georg-August-Universitaet Goettingen Institut fuer Informatik Telematics Group Lotzestrasse 16-18 37083 Goettingen Fax: +49 (551) 39-1 44 03 Tel: +49 (551) 39-1 35 78 Email: lei@informatik.uni-goettingen.de _______________________________________________ SAM mailing list SAM@irtf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sam From sam-bounces@irtf.org Fri Feb 23 09:50:17 2007 Received: from [127.0.0.1] (helo=stiedprmman1.va.neustar.com) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1HKbkM-0002Eh-4g; Fri, 23 Feb 2007 09:50:06 -0500 Received: from [10.91.34.44] (helo=ietf-mx.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1HKbkL-0002EW-GA for sam@irtf.org; Fri, 23 Feb 2007 09:50:05 -0500 Received: from ik-out-1112.google.com ([66.249.90.178]) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1HKbkG-00072n-QZ for sam@irtf.org; Fri, 23 Feb 2007 09:50:05 -0500 Received: by ik-out-1112.google.com with SMTP id c21so206250ika for ; Fri, 23 Feb 2007 06:50:00 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=beta; h=domainkey-signature:received:received:message-id:date:from:sender:to:subject:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:references:x-google-sender-auth; b=eSLhdx4q5R8/i9l0VSIdaxgIpI4O4b6YfOZCjS/IwKwPu+rZE4fJj3QCQapoERnKqaxEdaEZDGNTQt0h/cH/mo8YlrTqu4QuWV8QLf9CNGN3TbFGjdbkfnTQnv/MLvhASd3MMOoNl34wnhzClvRJtTfmD7YDpPvdg0UPe3YTrnU= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=beta; h=received:message-id:date:from:sender:to:subject:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:references:x-google-sender-auth; b=D0uyiRD1He6Fa8otqBQeOw5YhYu6JRMTjpuDslXer4iMda05VFxeAnvYpbQu02k9rDL6v4xjYCimvCF5PcKtwRPSHMQ9qz5ipSE3bePxySSOb+G/xfljS3YQGi3jnoZABoH8cMA+lOc9iA014E8OMN8khE88sXMEgFmVGgfJzyk= Received: by 10.114.46.1 with SMTP id t1mr899963wat.1172242197177; Fri, 23 Feb 2007 06:49:57 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.114.37.2 with HTTP; Fri, 23 Feb 2007 06:49:57 -0800 (PST) Message-ID: <4ce32a820702230649u2866415fn9794816d12f7506f@mail.gmail.com> Date: Fri, 23 Feb 2007 09:49:57 -0500 From: "John Buford" To: sam@irtf.org In-Reply-To: <4ce32a820702230647k53aa7bf1g65477154ea09ae46@mail.gmail.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <4ce32a820701191021g76dc8630y76757fcc31ace44e@mail.gmail.com> <4ce32a820701231222m48b6bb3fue5e70b03cb6972ba@mail.gmail.com> <4ce32a820702230647k53aa7bf1g65477154ea09ae46@mail.gmail.com> X-Google-Sender-Auth: 4181fb3bb4acce1f X-Spam-Score: 0.1 (/) X-Scan-Signature: 3fbd9b434023f8abfcb1532abaec7a21 Subject: [SAM] CFP - P2P Networking Track at Globecom 2007 - deadline March 15 X-BeenThere: sam@irtf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: "For use by members of the Scalable Adaptive Multicast \(SAM\) RG" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============1435107793==" Errors-To: sam-bounces@irtf.org --===============1435107793== Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_Part_48346_16811092.1172242197107" ------=_Part_48346_16811092.1172242197107 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Disposition: inline (Apologies for duplicate postings) IEEE GLOBECOM 2007 (Washington, D.C., November 26-30, 2007) with the theme "Innovate, Educate, Accelerate", will feature a General Symposium and 9 technical symposia. The focus of the General Symposium is on Emerging Technologies. The *Peer-to-Peer Networking Track* in the General Symposium invites state-of-art work in all areas of peer-to-peer networking, overlay networking, peer casting, application layer multicasting, service overlays, peer-to-peer search algorithms. Topics of particular interest include, but are not limited to: Overlay architectures and topologies Overlay maintenance algorithms Overlay and application layer multicast Peercasting and overlay content distribution Federated and hierarchical overlays One-hop and variable-hop overlays Peer-to-peer SIP Overlay support for mobile nodes Measurement based overlays Replication and load-balancing strategies Service overlays Peer-to-peer service/resource discovery Tools for large-scale performance analysis Distributed security techniques Novel applications Semantic routing Advanced search and query techniques Semantic search Coupling of agent systems and P2P systems Experience with deployed systems Submission deadline is March 15, 2007. For further information: P2P Networking Track, see: http://samrg.org/globecom2007-gs/p2p-networking/ Globecom 2007 - General Symposium, see: http://samrg.org/globecom2007-gs/index.html Globecom 2007 - http://www.comsoc.org/confs/globecom/2007/tech.html Technical Program Committee John Buford (Avaya Labs, USA) - Track Chair Jiannong Cao (Hong Kong Polytechnic) Anwitaman Datta (NTU) Christos Gkantsidis (Microsoft Research) Aaron Harwood (University of Melbourne) P. Krishnan (Avaya Labs) Ben Leong (National University of Singapore) Alexander L=F6ser (IBM Almaden) Eng Keong Lua (NTT Laboratories) Gianluca Moro (University of Bologna) Keith Ross (Polytechnic University) Kurt Tutschku (University of W=FCrzburg) Robbert van Renesse (Cornell University) Klaus Wehrle (RWTH Aachen University) Haifeng Yu (National University of Singapore) ------=_Part_48346_16811092.1172242197107 Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Disposition: inline
(Apologi= es for duplicate postings)

IEEE GLOBECOM 2007 (Washington, D.C., November 26-30, 2007) = with the theme "Innovate, Educate, Accelerate", will featu= re a General Symposium and 9 technical symposia.  The focus of the Gen= eral Symposium is on Emerging Technologies.=20

The Peer-to-Peer Networking T= rack in the General Symposium invites state-of-art work in all= areas of peer-to-peer networking, overlay networking, peer casting, applic= ation layer multicasting, service overlays, peer-to-peer search algorithms.= Topics of particular interest include, but are not limited to:=20

  • Overlay architectures and topologies
  • Overlay maintenance algorithms
  • Overlay and application layer mult= icast
  • Peercasting and overlay content di= stribution
  • Federated and hierarchical overlay= s
  • One-hop and variable-hop overlays =
  • Peer-to-peer SIP
  • Overlay support for mobile nodes <= /font>
  • Measurement based overlays
  • Replication and load-balancing str= ategies
  • Service overlays
  • Peer-to-peer service/resource disc= overy
  • Tools for large-scale performance = analysis
  • Distributed security techniques
  • Novel applications
  • Semantic routing
  • Advanced search and query techniqu= es
  • Semantic search
  • Coupling of agent systems and P2P = systems
  • Experience with deployed systems <= /font>
    •  
    Submission deadline is March 15,= 2007.
     
    For further information:<= /span>
    Globecom 2007 - General Symposiu= m, see: http://samr= g.org/globecom2007-gs/index.html
     
    Technical Program Committee

    John Buford (Avaya Labs, US= A) - Track Chair

    Jiannong Cao (Hong Kong Polytechnic)
    Anwitaman D= atta (NTU)
    Christos Gkantsidis (Microsoft Research)
    Aaron Harwood (U= niversity of Melbourne)=20
    P. Krishnan (Avaya Labs)
    Ben Leong (National University of Singapore= )
    Alexander L=F6ser (IBM Almaden)
    Eng Keong Lua (NTT Laboratories) =
    Gianluca Moro (University of Bologna)
    Keith Ross (Polytechnic Unive= rsity)=20
    Kurt Tutschku (University of W=FCrzburg)
    Robbert van Renesse  = (Cornell University)
    Klaus Wehrle (RWTH Aachen University)
    Haifeng = Yu (National University of Singapore)

    =20 =20 ------=_Part_48346_16811092.1172242197107-- --===============1435107793== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline _______________________________________________ SAM mailing list SAM@irtf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sam --===============1435107793==--