https://redmine.named-data.net/https://redmine.named-data.net/favicon.ico?14759811232015-10-29T10:37:13ZNDN project issue tracking systemNDN Specifications - Feature #3301: Reserve ContentType for Manifesthttps://redmine.named-data.net/issues/3301?journal_id=133862015-10-29T10:37:13ZAlex Afanasyev
<ul></ul><p>Does it needs to be defined at the network-level? If so, we need to formally define it in the spec.</p>
NDN Specifications - Feature #3301: Reserve ContentType for Manifesthttps://redmine.named-data.net/issues/3301?journal_id=133872015-10-29T10:49:36ZIlya Moiseenkoiliamo@ucla.edu
<ul></ul><blockquote>
<p>Does it needs to be defined at the network-level? If so, we need to formally define it in the spec.</p>
</blockquote>
<p>There are 3 TLVs added:</p>
<ol>
<li> Contenttype_Manifest - doesn't need an explanation, right? </li>
<li> ManifestCatalogue - Manifest contains a catalogue of names. Router may need to look at it in order to cache more effectively for example.</li>
<li> KeyValuePair - Is used in Manifest and application NACKs. For example, Retry-After NACK is implemented with this TLV.</li>
</ol>
NDN Specifications - Feature #3301: Reserve ContentType for Manifesthttps://redmine.named-data.net/issues/3301?journal_id=134032015-10-29T18:26:26ZJunxiao Shi
<ul></ul><p>Quote Lixia's email from 20150908:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>(a developer) declared a few things to put into the implementation as needed by his thesis, yet the technical rationals behind those implementation decisions sound rather unconvincing.<br>
I wonder whether we should bring those designs (that affect NFD implementation) for some explanation first, before (a developer) simply declares his needs and puts into the implementation decision.</p>
</blockquote>
<p>According to this opinion, a full explanation of the semantics of these TLVs should be provided, before I can agree to adding this into the implementation.</p>
NDN Specifications - Feature #3301: Reserve ContentType for Manifesthttps://redmine.named-data.net/issues/3301?journal_id=134052015-10-30T18:43:05ZAlex Afanasyev
<ul></ul><p>I partially disagree with note-3, as there are two things mixed:</p>
<ul>
<li><p>If these blocks are outside networking level (=need not be understood by routers, in application TLV range), there is no additional explanation necessary. Just the corresponding implementation (a new separate header file defining the TLV codes).</p></li>
<li><p>If these blocks need to be at the networking level, additional explanations and discussions are necessary.</p></li>
</ul>
<p>In any case, we need to have a formal specification for the declared blocks, however self-explanatory they are.</p>
NDN Specifications - Feature #3301: Reserve ContentType for Manifesthttps://redmine.named-data.net/issues/3301?journal_id=135232015-11-05T11:24:08ZJunxiao Shi
<ul></ul><blockquote>
<p>If these blocks are outside networking level (=need not be understood by routers, in application TLV range), there is no additional explanation necessary. Just the corresponding implementation (a new separate header file defining the TLV codes).</p>
</blockquote>
<p>If they are application, they can appear only in the application (or in consumer-producer-API library), not in ndn-cxx.</p>
<p>note-3 quote originally refers to NFD <code>Transport::Packet::localEndpoint</code> field, which is not on the wire, but Lixia still demands explanation, so I disagree with "no additional explanation necessary".</p>
NDN Specifications - Feature #3301: Reserve ContentType for Manifesthttps://redmine.named-data.net/issues/3301?journal_id=136332015-11-12T15:10:32ZJunxiao Shi
<ul><li><strong>Project</strong> changed from <i>ndn-cxx</i> to <i>NDN Specifications</i></li><li><strong>Subject</strong> changed from <i>Add new TLV for Manifest and application NACK processing</i> to <i>Reserve ContentType for Manifest</i></li><li><strong>Description</strong> updated (<a title="View differences" href="/journals/13633/diff?detail_id=12008">diff</a>)</li><li><strong>Category</strong> deleted (<del><i>Base</i></del>)</li><li><strong>Priority</strong> changed from <i>High</i> to <i>Normal</i></li><li><strong>Target version</strong> deleted (<del><i>v0.4</i></del>)</li><li><strong>Start date</strong> deleted (<del><i>10/29/2015</i></del>)</li></ul><p>20151112 conference call agrees to reserve code <strong>4</strong> for this experimental purpose.<br><br>
<code>ManifestCatalogue</code> and <code>KeyValuePair</code> in note-2 should go into application range.</p>
NDN Specifications - Feature #3301: Reserve ContentType for Manifesthttps://redmine.named-data.net/issues/3301?journal_id=225592018-03-02T04:57:13ZJunxiao Shi
<ul><li><strong>Tracker</strong> changed from <i>Task</i> to <i>Feature</i></li><li><strong>Status</strong> changed from <i>New</i> to <i>Resolved</i></li></ul><p>Assignment is recorded in <a class="wiki-page" href="https://redmine.named-data.net/projects/ndn-tlv/wiki/ContentType">ContentType</a> rev6.</p>
NDN Specifications - Feature #3301: Reserve ContentType for Manifesthttps://redmine.named-data.net/issues/3301?journal_id=228392018-04-01T05:03:00ZJunxiao Shi
<ul><li><strong>Status</strong> changed from <i>Resolved</i> to <i>Closed</i></li></ul>