Subject: Re: [ppsp] 答复: Re: ppsp revised charter proposal

From: "zhangyunfei" <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 28 Dec 2009 15:18:08 +0800

Thanks Harold for your clarification from UUSee's experience.
One more question:People may be confused about the "peer list" in the tracker protocol and the "peer list"in the peer protocol since they are same literally. We may express it clearer about this. Any good suggestions?
BR
Yunfei

zhangyunfei
2009-12-28

发件人： liuhy @ uusee
发送时间： 2009-12-28 15:17:58
收件人： [email-masked]; zhangyunfei
抄送： [email-masked]; [email-masked]; [email-masked]
主题： Re: 答复: Re: [ppsp] ppsp revised charter proposal

Agree.

"Peer list" is much clear than "neighbor peers".

Actually, peers usually exchanges the list of "useful list". Since connected peers either acquir resources or provide resources to each other. So, peers can do some filter work locally.

2009-12-28 

刘怀宇 /  Harold Liu
悠视网 CTO
北京悠视互动科技有限公司
地址：北京市东城区东直门北小街青龙胡同1号歌华大厦9层
邮编：100007
电话：+86-10-84186689
手机：13901143864
邮件：[email-masked]
网址：www.uusee.com 

发件人： [email-masked] 
发送时间： 2009-12-28  14:49:35 
收件人： zhangyunfei 
抄送： [email-masked]; liuhy; [email-masked]; [email-masked] 
主题： 答复: Re: [ppsp] ppsp revised charter proposal 

Yes, it may arouse some problems. If PPSP want to do that, some lite security mechanism maybe needed. 

Besides that, should we change "exchange neighbor peers" to "exchange peer lists information (owning some resource)" so as to avoid the confusion of 'neighbor'? 

"zhangyunfei" <[email-masked]> 
发件人:  [email-masked] 
2009-12-28 14:23 收件人"[email-masked]" <[email-masked]> 
抄送"[email-masked]" <[email-masked]>, liuhy <[email-masked]> 
主题Re: [ppsp] ppsp revised charter proposal

Thanks Lichun. 
According to my understanding,peers exchange the neigbor peers information,i.e. which peer remains connected and which pieces already have been downloaded. As for non-neigbor peers which it just receives from the tracker, I am really not sure about the effect of such exchange because such peers are un-confirmed. 
Is there anybody who can tell us more about this point in practice?James?Harold?Omer? 
Thanks! 
  
BR 
Yunfei 

zhangyunfei 
2009-12-28 

发件人： [email-masked] 
发送时间： 2009-12-28 11:04:21 
收件人： zhangyunfei 
抄送： [email-masked] 
主题： Re: re: [ppsp] ppsp revised charter proposal 

The charter says "exchange neighbor peers". I think the peer list may include peers other than neighbors. Peers can also exchange neighbors of neighbors and non-neighbor peers known from tracker. 

BR, 
Lichun

"zhangyunfei" <[email-masked]> 
2009-12-28 10:13 
收件人"[email-masked]" <[email-masked]> 
抄送"[email-masked]" <[email-masked]> 
主题Re: re: [ppsp] ppsp revised charter proposal

Yes,you are right,Lichun. 
As suggested in the BOF and mailing list,peer gossip(including exchange of peer list)can make peers know more peers and alleviate the burden of the tracker. 
 
BR 
Yunfei 

zhangyunfei 
2009-12-28 

发件人： [email-masked] 
发送时间： 2009-12-28 09:36:31 
收件人： zhangyunfei 
抄送： [email-masked]; [email-masked] 
主题： re: [ppsp] ppsp revised charter proposal 

Hi, yunfei. 
Peers can exchange peer lists, right? 

Best regards,
Lichun Li

"zhangyunfei" <[email-masked]> 
发件人:  [email-masked] 
2009-12-26 16:52 
收件人"[email-masked]" <[email-masked]> 
抄送
主题[ppsp] ppsp revised charter proposal

Dear all, 
   The latest version of PPSP charter is attached.Welcome to comment on this.I guess many of you guys are enjoying the Christmas holiday.Merry X'mas and happy new year!Wish to hear your valuable suggestions in the beginning of 2010.:) 
   Hope PPSP can have a great development in the new year with all of your participation and contribution. 
The main modifications are: 
1)Para 2: 
a)wish to make it better understood about what the tracker protocol and the peer protocol differ in and reply the BOF comments that the two protocols may be a single one; 
b)Add the NAT issue raised in the BOF; 
2)Para3: 
a) Para3-bullet 4,adding the gossip communication in peer protocol as discussed in the mailing list; 
b)Para3-bullet7, deleted as suggested by Lars that optional part can be detered until we think it clearer; 
3)Para4, adding LEDBAT as reference raised in the BOF. 
4)Para5,deleting privay raised in the BOF. 
5)Para6: 
a)bullet1:Adding the description of considering the NAT traversal and the multiple stream senario as discussed in the BOF and mailing list. 
BR 
Yunfei 
************************************************************************* 
Description of PPSP Working Group: 
The Peer-to-Peer (P2P) Streaming Protocol working group (PPSP WG) is chartered to develop standard signaling protocols (called PPSP protocols) for multiple types of entities (e.g. intelligent endpoints, caches, content distribution network nodes, and/or other edge devices) to participate in P2P streaming systems in both fixed and mobile Internet. 

There are two kinds of components in PPSP protocols, i.e., “trackers” and “peers”. PPSP protocols include the PPSP tracker protocol – a signaling protocol between “trackers” and “peers”, and the PPSP peer protocol – a signaling protocol among “peers”. The two protocols ensure peers to get streaming data within certain time constraints. PPSP tracker protocol deals with the initial and periodical exchanges between tracker and peers: initially the peers contact the tracker to report their static information (like IP address, NAT types and other useful things) and get a list of peers for a specific channel or streaming file from the tracker; periodically the tracker maintains lists of participating peers according to the report from the peers about their status information. PPSP peer protocol deals with the exchanges among peers. The peer exchanges its data availability and neighbor peer information with other peers. With these information, it can connect with these peers for further data downloading.   

This WG's primary tasks are to produce:
1. A “problem statement” document describing the problems, incentives, and scope of developing the PPSP protocols, as well as common terminologies and concepts. 

2. A “requirements” document listing the requirements on the designed PPSP protocols (e.g., general functionality and performance requirements of PPSP protocols or basic types of information that PPSP protocols should communicate to facilitate P2P streaming). 

3. An "architectural survey" document explaining the current P2P streaming architectures, in particular tracker-based P2P streaming, and key issues in best practice. 

4. A proposed standard defining the PPSP peer protocol. This protocol will define how PPSP peers advertise data availability and exchange neighbor peers. The protocol will also define the requests and responses of data chunks among PPSP peers. 

5. A proposed standard defining the PPSP tracker protocol. This protocol will define how PPSP peers inform and request information from PPSP trackers and how PPSP trackers reply to the requests. 

6. A “usage document” explaining how the protocols defined above, along with existing IETF protocols, such as RELAOD, ALTO and RTSP, can inter-operate; and how they may be integrated together to produce complete P2P streaming systems. 

The work planned for the PPSP WG is distinct from, but requires close participation with, work in other IETF WGs, particularly P2PSIP, ALTO,LEDBAT and MMUSIC. The PPSP WG assumes that it cannot modify baseline P2PSIP, ALTO, LEDBAT and MMUSIC behaviors. If PPSP determines that extensions to P2PSIP, ALTO,LEDBAT and MMUSIC are needed, PPSP will seek to define such extensions and present to the respective working groups. 

The design of PPSP has to consider security issues. The protocol document will contain a complete description of the security issues that PPSP should address. 

The following topics are excluded from this WG's scope:
1. Transport mechanisms for data transmission among PPSP peers, e.g. using TCP or UDP, unicast or multicast, etc. However the  design  of  PPSP  will  consider how it can be combined with the transport mechanisms, including NAT traversal problem. The design of PPSP will also consider the scenario of transmission of multiple streams  (layered  media).  This includes considering various media descriptions (e.g. data chunk description in peer protocol) after investigating different media coding mechanisms (e.g. SVC, MDC) to incorporate their features in the protocol. 

2. Network coding mechanisms in P2P streaming. Network coding may be used in P2P streaming, but its support is beyond the scope of current charter. 

3. Play-out mechanisms including streaming control (e.g., pause, fast-forward, and rewind). 

4. Algorithms that may be different in different deployments (e.g., chunk selection, local storage strategies). 

5. Research type questions related to P2P streaming. This WG will instead forward such questions to the IRTF P2PRG or other RG as appropriate. Examples include cache management. 
Goals and Milestones: 
Apr 2010 Working Group Last Call for problem statement 
Jun 2010 Submit problem statement to IESG as Informational document 
Aug 2010 Working Group Last Call for architecture survey 
Aug 2010 Working Group Last Call for requirements 
Oct 
2010 Submit architecture survey to IESG as Informational document 
Oct 2010 Submit requirements to IESG as Informational document 
Apr 2011 Working Group Last Call for PPSP peer protocol 
Apr 
2011 Working Group Last Call for PPSP tracker protocol 
Aug 2011 Submit PPSP peer protocol to IESG as Proposed Standard 
Aug 2011 Submit PPSP tracker protocol to IESG as Proposed Standard 
Nov 2011 Working Group Last Call of usage document 
Nov 2011 Working Group Last Call of mobility BCP document 
Jan 2012 Submit usage document to IESG as Informational document 
Jan 2012 Submit mobility BCP document to IESG as Informational document 
Apr 2012 Dissolve or re-charter 

zhangyunfei 
2009-12-26_______________________________________________
ppsp mailing list
[email-masked]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ppsp

--------------------------------------------------------
ZTE Information Security Notice: The information contained in this mail is solely property of the sender's organization. This mail communication is confidential. Recipients named above are obligated to maintain secrecy and are not permitted to disclose the contents of this communication to others.
This email and any files transmitted with it are confidential and intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to whom they are addressed. If you have received this email in error please notify the originator of the message. Any views expressed in this message are those of the individual sender.
This message has been scanned for viruses and Spam by ZTE Anti-Spam system.

--------------------------------------------------------
ZTE Information Security Notice: The information contained in this mail is solely property of the sender's organization. This mail communication is confidential. Recipients named above are obligated to maintain secrecy and are not permitted to disclose the contents of this communication to others.
This email and any files transmitted with it are confidential and intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to whom they are addressed. If you have received this email in error please notify the originator of the message. Any views expressed in this message are those of the individual sender.
This message has been scanned for viruses and Spam by ZTE Anti-Spam system.
_______________________________________________
ppsp mailing list
[email-masked]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ppsp

---

From: Ning Zong <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 28 Dec 2009 15:28:04 +0800

IMO, we can use peer list as general terms for both tracker and peer
communications, - bearing mind that tracker and peer can both have their
local policy for sending out which peers, such as “useful peers”,
“recommended peers”, etc.

Anyway, I also agree that “neighbor peers” is a little confusing.

Thanks!

BR,

Ning Zong

  _____  

From: [email-masked] [mailto:[email-masked]] On Behalf Of
zhangyunfei
Sent: Monday, December 28, 2009 3:18 PM
To: liuhy @ uusee; [email-masked]
Cc: [email-masked]
Subject: Re: [ppsp] 答复: Re: ppsp revised charter proposal

One more question:People may be confused about the "peer list" in the
tracker protocol and the "peer list"in the peer protocol since they are same
literally. We may express it clearer about this. Any good suggestions?

BR

Yunfei

  _____  

zhangyunfei

2009-12-28

  _____  

发件人： liuhy @ uusee

Agree.

Actually, peers usually exchanges the list of "useful list". Since connected
peers either acquir resources or provide resources to each other. So, peers
can do some filter work locally.

2009-12-28 

  _____  

刘怀宇 /  Harold Liu
悠视网 CTO
北京悠视互动科技有限公司

邮件： <mailto:[email-masked]> [email-masked]
网址： <http://www.uusee.com/> www.uusee.com 

  _____  

发件人： [email-masked] 

收件人： zhangyunfei 

Yes, it may arouse some problems. If PPSP want to do that, some lite
security mechanism maybe needed. 

Besides that, should we change "exchange neighbor peers" to "exchange peer
lists information (owning some resource)" so as to avoid the confusion of
'neighbor'? 

2009-12-28 14:23 

收件人

"[email-masked]" <[email-masked]> 

抄送

"[email-masked]" <[email-masked]>, liuhy <[email-masked]> 

主题

Re: [ppsp] ppsp revised charter proposal

Thanks Lichun. 
According to my understanding,peers exchange the neigbor peers
information,i.e. which peer remains connected and which pieces already have
been downloaded. As for non-neigbor peers which it just receives from the
tracker, I am really not sure about the effect of such exchange because such
peers are un-confirmed. 
Is there anybody who can tell us more about this point in
practice?James?Harold?Omer? 
Thanks! 
  
BR 
Yunfei 

  _____  

zhangyunfei 
2009-12-28 

  _____  

The charter says "exchange neighbor peers". I think the peer list may
include peers other than neighbors. Peers can also exchange neighbors of
neighbors and non-neighbor peers known from tracker. 

BR, 
Lichun

2009-12-28 10:13 

收件人

"[email-masked]" <[email-masked]> 

抄送

"[email-masked]" <[email-masked]> 

主题

Re: re: [ppsp] ppsp revised charter proposal

Yes,you are right,Lichun. 
As suggested in the BOF and mailing list,peer gossip(including exchange of
peer list)can make peers know more peers and alleviate the burden of the
tracker. 
 
BR 
Yunfei 

  _____  

zhangyunfei 
2009-12-28 

  _____  

Hi, yunfei. 

Best regards,
Lichun Li

2009-12-26 16:52 

收件人

"[email-masked]" <[email-masked]> 

抄送

主题

[ppsp] ppsp revised charter proposal

Dear all, 

   The latest version of PPSP charter is attached.Welcome to comment on
this.I guess many of you guys are enjoying the Christmas holiday.Merry X'mas
and happy new year!Wish to hear your valuable suggestions in the beginning
of 2010.:) 

   Hope PPSP can have a great development in the new year with all of your
participation and contribution. 

1)Para 2: 

a)wish to make it better understood about what the tracker protocol and the
peer protocol differ in and reply the BOF comments that the two protocols
may be a single one; 

2)Para3: 

a) Para3-bullet 4,adding the gossip communication in peer protocol as
discussed in the mailing list; 

b)Para3-bullet7, deleted as suggested by Lars that optional part can be
detered until we think it clearer; 

5)Para6: 

a)bullet1:Adding the description of considering the NAT traversal and the
multiple stream senario as discussed in the BOF and mailing list. 

BR 

Yunfei 

************************************************************************* 
Description of PPSP Working Group: 
The Peer-to-Peer (P2P) Streaming Protocol working group (PPSP WG) is
chartered to develop standard signaling protocols (called PPSP protocols)
for multiple types of entities (e.g. intelligent endpoints, caches, content
distribution network nodes, and/or other edge devices) to participate in P2P
streaming systems in both fixed and mobile Internet. 

There are two kinds of components in PPSP protocols, i.e., “trackers” and
“peers”. PPSP protocols include the PPSP tracker protocol – a signaling
protocol between “trackers” and “peers”, and the PPSP peer protocol – a
signaling protocol among “peers”. The two protocols ensure peers to get
streaming data within certain time constraints. PPSP tracker protocol deals
with the initial and periodical exchanges between tracker and peers:
initially the peers contact the tracker to report their static information
(like IP address, NAT types and other useful things) and get a list of peers
for a specific channel or streaming file from the tracker; periodically the
tracker maintains lists of participating peers according to the report from
the peers about their status information. PPSP peer protocol deals with the
exchanges among peers. The peer exchanges its data availability and neighbor
peer information with other peers. With these information, it can connect
with these peers for further data downloading.   

This WG's primary tasks are to produce:
1. A “problem statement” document describing the problems, incentives, and
scope of developing the PPSP protocols, as well as common terminologies and
concepts. 

2. A “requirements” document listing the requirements on the designed PPSP
protocols (e.g., general functionality and performance requirements of PPSP
protocols or basic types of information that PPSP protocols should
communicate to facilitate P2P streaming). 

3. An "architectural survey" document explaining the current P2P streaming
architectures, in particular tracker-based P2P streaming, and key issues in
best practice. 

4. A proposed standard defining the PPSP peer protocol. This protocol will
define how PPSP peers advertise data availability and exchange neighbor
peers. The protocol will also define the requests and responses of data
chunks among PPSP peers. 

5. A proposed standard defining the PPSP tracker protocol. This protocol
will define how PPSP peers inform and request information from PPSP trackers
and how PPSP trackers reply to the requests. 

6. A “usage document” explaining how the protocols defined above, along
with existing IETF protocols, such as RELAOD, ALTO and RTSP, can
inter-operate; and how they may be integrated together to produce complete
P2P streaming systems. 

The work planned for the PPSP WG is distinct from, but requires close
participation with, work in other IETF WGs, particularly P2PSIP, ALTO,LEDBAT
and MMUSIC. The PPSP WG assumes that it cannot modify baseline P2PSIP, ALTO,
LEDBAT and MMUSIC behaviors. If PPSP determines that extensions to P2PSIP,
ALTO,LEDBAT and MMUSIC are needed, PPSP will seek to define such extensions
and present to the respective working groups. 

The design of PPSP has to consider security issues. The protocol document
will contain a complete description of the security issues that PPSP should
address. 

The following topics are excluded from this WG's scope:
1. Transport mechanisms for data transmission among PPSP peers, e.g. using
TCP or UDP, unicast or multicast, etc. However the  design  of  PPSP  will
consider how it can be combined with the transport mechanisms, including NAT
traversal problem. The design of PPSP will also consider the scenario of
transmission of multiple streams  (layered  media).  This includes
considering various media descriptions (e.g. data chunk description in peer
protocol) after investigating different media coding mechanisms (e.g. SVC,
MDC) to incorporate their features in the protocol. 

2. Network coding mechanisms in P2P streaming. Network coding may be used in
P2P streaming, but its support is beyond the scope of current charter. 

3. Play-out mechanisms including streaming control (e.g., pause,
fast-forward, and rewind). 

4. Algorithms that may be different in different deployments (e.g., chunk
selection, local storage strategies). 

5. Research type questions related to P2P streaming. This WG will instead
forward such questions to the IRTF P2PRG or other RG as appropriate.
Examples include cache management. 
Goals and Milestones: 

Apr 2010 

Working Group Last Call for problem statement 

Jun 2010 

Submit problem statement to IESG as Informational document 

Aug 2010 

Working Group Last Call for architecture survey 

Aug 2010 

Working Group Last Call for requirements 

Oct 
2010 

Submit architecture survey to IESG as Informational document 

Oct 2010 

Submit requirements to IESG as Informational document 

Apr 2011 

Working Group Last Call for PPSP peer protocol 

Apr 
2011 

Working Group Last Call for PPSP tracker protocol 

Aug 2011 

Submit PPSP peer protocol to IESG as Proposed Standard 

Aug 2011 

Submit PPSP tracker protocol to IESG as Proposed Standard 

Nov 2011 

Working Group Last Call of usage document 

Nov 2011 

Working Group Last Call of mobility BCP document 

Jan 2012 

Submit usage document to IESG as Informational document 

Jan 2012 

Submit mobility BCP document to IESG as Informational document 

Apr 2012 

Dissolve or re-charter 

  _____  

zhangyunfei 

--------------------------------------------------------
ZTE Information Security Notice: The information contained in this mail is
solely property of the sender's organization. This mail communication is
confidential. Recipients named above are obligated to maintain secrecy and
are not permitted to disclose the contents of this communication to others.
This email and any files transmitted with it are confidential and intended
solely for the use of the individual or entity to whom they are addressed.
If you have received this email in error please notify the originator of the
message. Any views expressed in this message are those of the individual
sender.
This message has been scanned for viruses and Spam by ZTE Anti-Spam system.

--------------------------------------------------------
ZTE Information Security Notice: The information contained in this mail is
solely property of the sender's organization. This mail communication is
confidential. Recipients named above are obligated to maintain secrecy and
are not permitted to disclose the contents of this communication to others.
This email and any files transmitted with it are confidential and intended
solely for the use of the individual or entity to whom they are addressed.
If you have received this email in error please notify the originator of the
message. Any views expressed in this message are those of the individual
sender.
This message has been scanned for viruses and Spam by ZTE Anti-Spam system.
_______________________________________________
ppsp mailing list
[email-masked]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ppsp

---

From: "Xiao, Lin (NSN - CN/Beijing)" <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 28 Dec 2009 16:01:08 +0800

Hi Yunfei,
 
To define the ppsp peer protocol, The charter writes: This protocol will define how PPSP peers advertise data availability and exchange neighbor peers.
 
I think, it means a peer is required to exchange 2 kinds of information:  the peer's won data availability,and other peers connected with the peer who have related data. And the second information is the useful extension to the peer list from the tracker. Right?
 
So, the sentence could be changed as: This protocol will define how PPSP peers exchange their won data availability and enrich their peer lists at the same time among peers.
 
However, the question is, should we give such details about which content should be exchanged in Charter stage? Or just to simply say " define how to exchange useful information among peers"? 
 
Br
Xiao Lin

________________________________

From: [email-masked] [mailto:[email-masked]] On Behalf Of ext zhangyunfei
Sent: Monday, December 28, 2009 3:18 PM
To: liuhy @ uusee; [email-masked]
Cc: [email-masked]
Subject: Re: [ppsp] 答复: Re: ppsp revised charter proposal

Thanks Harold for your clarification from UUSee's experience.
One more question:People may be confused about the "peer list" in the tracker protocol and the "peer list"in the peer protocol since they are same literally. We may express it clearer about this. Any good suggestions?
BR
Yunfei
________________________________

zhangyunfei
2009-12-28
________________________________

发件人： liuhy @ uusee
 
Agree.

2009-12-28 
________________________________

刘怀宇 /  Harold Liu
悠视网 CTO
北京悠视互动科技有限公司

邮件：[email-masked] <mailto:[email-masked]> 
网址：www.uusee.com <http://www.uusee.com/>  

________________________________

发件人： [email-masked] 

2009-12-28 14:23 

收件人

Thanks Lichun. 
  
BR 
Yunfei 

________________________________

zhangyunfei 
2009-12-28 

________________________________

BR, 
Lichun

2009-12-28 10:13 

收件人

 
BR 
Yunfei 

________________________________

zhangyunfei 
2009-12-28 

________________________________

Hi, yunfei. 

Best regards,
Lichun Li

2009-12-26 16:52 

收件人

Dear all, 

1)Para 2: 

2)Para3: 

5)Para6: 

BR 

Yunfei 

  

________________________________

zhangyunfei

---

From: "zhangyunfei" <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 28 Dec 2009 16:55:16 +0800

Hi Lin,
   Thanks for the comments and the revision.I like your first suggestion on the expression and modify the sentence based on your version: This protocol will define how PPSP peers advertise data availability and exchange for augmenting the peer list.Thanks again!
BR
Yunfei

zhangyunfei
2009-12-28

发件人： Xiao, Lin (NSN - CN/Beijing)
发送时间： 2009-12-28 16:22:53
收件人： ext zhangyunfei; liuhy @ uusee; [email-masked]
抄送： [email-masked]
主题： RE: [ppsp] 答复: Re: ppsp revised charter proposal

Hi Yunfei,

Br
Xiao Lin

zhangyunfei
2009-12-28

发件人： liuhy @ uusee

Agree.

2009-12-28 

刘怀宇 /  Harold Liu
悠视网 CTO
北京悠视互动科技有限公司

发件人： [email-masked] 

Thanks Lichun. 
  
BR 
Yunfei 

zhangyunfei 
2009-12-28 

BR, 
Lichun

 
BR 
Yunfei 

zhangyunfei 
2009-12-28 

Hi, yunfei. 

Best regards,
Lichun Li

Dear all, 

  

zhangyunfei

---

From: "Y.J. Gu" <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 31 Dec 2009 16:40:16 +0800

Hi all,
Tomorrow is the first day of 2010, the beginning of a new year.
Wish all of you have a Happy New Year and hope PPSP achieve its milestones
and targets.
^_^

Regards

Yingjie Gu

---

From: "zhangyunfei" <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 31 Dec 2009 21:05:00 +0800

Thanks Yingjie.Best wish to all of you and to PPSP.Happy new year!

BR
Yunfei

zhangyunfei
2009-12-31

发件人： Y.J. Gu
发送时间： 2009-12-31 16:50:46
收件人： [email-masked]
抄送： 
主题： [ppsp] Happy New Year!

Hi all,
Tomorrow is the first day of 2010, the beginning of a new year.
Wish all of you have a Happy New Year and hope PPSP achieve its milestones and targets.
^_^

Regards
Yingjie Gu