Re: [p2pi] [tsv-area] TANA proposed charter

[Murari Sridharan <muraris at microsoft.com>]

Isn't the goal here to achieve lower than best-effort, so essentially "Low Priority TCP", assuming non-TCP traffic flows E2E we can make it more general and call it "Congestion control for low priority flows"

Murari

-----Original Message-----
From: tsv-area-bounces at ietf.org [mailto:tsv-area-bounces at ietf.org] On Behalf Of Lars Eggert
Sent: Tuesday, October 21, 2008 11:01 AM
To: ext Eddy, Wesley M. (GRC-RCN0)[VZ]
Cc: TSV Area; tana at ietf.org; p2pi at ietf.org
Subject: Re: [tsv-area] TANA proposed charter

Hi,

On 2008-10-21, at 10:12, ext Eddy, Wesley M. (GRC-RCN0)[VZ] wrote:
> The charter, as written looks reasonable to me.  I just hate the name
> :).

the name was an ad hoc creation, and when it was picked, some of the
stuff that ended up being ALTO was part of the TANA scope - so it
needed to be broader.

If we can come up with a better name I'm all ears (and you make
several good suggestions below). What I'd like to avoid is a long
discussion about a text string, when what I'd rather like to see is a
discussion on whether the work we're going to attempt is reasonable.

Lars

> It should really be something like:
> "Minimizing Impact of Large Transfers" (MILT)
> "Concurrent Realtime And Bulk Applications" (CRABA)
> "Fast Transfers Adding Minimal Latency" (FTAML)
> "Bulk And Realtime Flows Interacting as Good Neighbors" (BARFIGN) --
> probably not a good one as it looks too much like "barfing" :)

I'm pretty sure CRABA would also have interesting soundex matches...

_______________________________________________
p2pi mailing list
p2pi at ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/p2pi