Transport protocols and bulk file transfer

[stanislav shalunov <>]

                      Bulk Transport WG Meeting
                         Tuesday, May 3, 2005

Attendees:
        Guy Almes
        Jeff Boote
        Eric Boyd
        Rich Carlson
        Les Cottrell
        Susan Evett (scribe)
        Yunhong Gu 
        Injong Rhee
        Chester Ruszczyk (MIT)
        Steve Senger
        Stanislav Shalunov 
        Dany Vandromme (GIP Renater)

Call started at 6:05 p.m. EDT. 

Agenda
New Working Group Status
Review of Previous Action Items

Stanislav reported that this is an `official' working group; the
charter was modified to be called ``Bulk Transport'' and there are
specifications as to what the group will NOT work on (to not cover
areas already covered by the IETF and GGF).

The chairs of the WG are Injong and Stanislav.

1. Review of Previous Action Items 

a. All: Review the draft API Steven sent out (v.6.) and get comments
   to Steven by Monday, 4/25; Steven to revise, as necessary, and get
   a revised document to Susan by Wednesday, 4/27. [Stas submitted the
   only coments; group should consider this a continuing action item.]

b. Susan to make copies of the design paper and the final draft of the
   API for distribution at the Member Meeting. [done -- 100 copies of
   design doc/ 75 of the api and they are mostly gone]

c. Susan and Lisong to research the legitimacy of Annals of
   Telecommunication by 4/20.  [Group to wait for better-matching
   venue for the design paper publication.]

With regards to item `c', the following discussion occurred: Stas
suggested the PFLDnet special issue (on networks) they are pulling
together.  Injong mentioned IEEE Networks; Stas asked Guy for input.
Guy considered a SIGCOMM workshop but that would take a lot of advance
planning.  He mentioned that, for SIGCOMM 2006 meeting (an ambitious
target) he advocated a one-day workshop with a good fit of topic on
the Wednesday of the week. There is a lot of competition to be the
`issue' but it is an idea for the future.

Injong and Stas agreed that a separate white paper for Networks (with
the design document as a basis for the paper) would be appropriate;
this would definitely require additional work.  It could be submitted
as a whitepaper to IEEE Networks (different paper).  Injong suggested
going for one paper and then aiming for the workshop with SIGCOMM
(high risk/high payoff) -- COMNET will be issuing a call for papers
sometime in June or July.  Stas and Injong felt that this would be a
good place to submit the paper.  Stas called for a `last call' on the
working group so that it could be published as working group document
(equivalent to a TR).  Injong will keep the group posted on the call
for papers when it comes out.

Stas has been working on code to do delay-based transfers -- Gu asked
what algorithm is in use in the demo; a delay-based congestion control
algorithm that is modulating (it increases the rate when delay is down
and decreases the transmission rate when delay is increased).  He
noted that noise filtering is not robust and this is a very early
prototype.

Stas did an informal demo of his code.

Injong: how are we going to develop the flow-based control algorithm
-- are we working on it together or are folks proposing several
options?  Stas felt this is a good platform for experimentation.  Rich
asked if it was run-time parameters or configuration parameters?  Stas
hadn't thought about this -- he considered compile-time vs. run-time.
He didn't think it would be productive to give users a tool that
requires extensive tuning (and require them to know how to use/modify
the tool).  Rich agreed; he personally thought compile-time would be
more useful but he didn't know if users would want to be able to
modify it.

Stas argued that, to be easily used, you need to have some preset
knobs for specific circumstances.  This mini-program was designed to
show that it is possible to send packets quickly and measure delay
well.  Injong suggested that the group decide how to design and
implement this, or someone has to design it and the group needs to
agree upon it.

Stas noted that we have the API specification, and a design document
but we don't have a protocol specification.  Injong felt that the
group has been avoiding that challenging question -- it was the one
question in his mind when the group was formed -- what is the
algorithm to be used.  Stas commented that it would be difficult to
make that choice without experimentation.

Guy said that it would be a good thing if the ultimate thing that
emerged did so after appropriate experimentation.  We don't know all
the answers yet.

Injong suggested that we consider existing research in this area as a
starting point -- he suggested that we look at the UDT protocol
developed by Gu/Bob Grossman (U-Ill). Stas felt that the group needed
to consider that an object-oriented program might be difficult to use
outside of an object-oriented area.  Injong wanted to look at this as
a starting point; the group should look at it to identify potential
limitations.  Question is: who to do it?  Stas said that he's already
started looking at the code; he'll take on further exploration of that
path.  He requested that Steven take a look at it from the PoV of his
application/API.

Stas brought up a few considerations (object-oriented design, threads,
etc.) -- Injong noted that they were very technical issues.  Injong
also thought folks in the group should be sharing algorithms they
thought should be considered.

Stas felt that, were it not for IPR concerns, we could look into using
FAST TCP protocols because it works well with what we are doing;
Injong noted that FAST TCP has its own issues/problems.  Injong
suggested sending out a call-for-proposals; group could ask Steven Low
if he had suggestions.  Guy agreed that it was time to start the CFPs
-- but include an IETF-like NoteWell statement that suggestions would
be open for experimentation by the Working Group.  Stas mentioned it
might be possible to take the IETF NoteWell and use whatever portion
was not `protected'.

Guy felt that one benefit of this would be that, seeing the algorithms
of the different TCP flavors would be that the group would be
designing the protocol with full understanding of the algorithms that
might need to hook in.  Stas noted that there are some classes of
protocols described in the design document (loss-based, delay-based,
etc.).

Injong suggested the group experiment with the UDT protocol; Stas said
that we try to make things work, using existing protocols
(algorithm/framework/etc) and changing them around to see what works.
Injong suggested that Stas review UDT and, once he is satisfied,
members of the group implement several options.

Stas noted that, before the CFP goes out, the IPR / NoteWell materials
should be researched.

Jeff asked how the API corresponds to the decision to start with UDT;
Stas said that the group has not made a decision to use it -- only a
decision to look at it.  Jeff noted that one of the criteria was that
you be able to implement the draft API on top of whatever is selected
as a starting point.

ACTION ITEMS:

a. All (except Stas and Steven): Review the draft API Steven sent out
   (http://transport.internet2.edu/transport-api-06.pdf) and get
   comments to Steven.

b. Injong to track the COMNET call for papers and keep the group
   posted when a date has been published.

c. Stas to further review UDT Protocol as a starting point -- Steven
   will also consider the protocol with reference to his
   application/API needs.

d. Injong to draft the CFP (by end of May); Stas to research using a
   modified IETF-like NoteWell in re IPR issues and provide Injong
   with a researched IPR statement (by 5/13).

e. Stas to send out `last call' for changes on the design document.

Next call is at 12:00 p.m. on 13 May 2005 using the usual dial in
numbers and pin (0111111).

Meeting ended at 7:03 p.m. EDT.

-- 
Stanislav Shalunov              http://www.internet2.edu/~shalunov/

"The power of accurate observation is commonly called cynicism by
those who have not got it."                     -- G. B. Shaw