Subject: [nwcrg] Update of the "Network Coding Taxonomy" internet-draft

From: Vincent Roca <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 6 Oct 2016 10:16:46 +0200

Hello,

> In any case, I think that updating the terminology I-D is our immediate objective as a group.
> Submission deadline: 2016-10-31 (Monday)

My email was not very detailed and I've been asked for clarifications. So here they are
in this new discussion thread...

I'm referring to the following, now expired, Internet Draft:
	"Network Coding Taxonomy"
	https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-firoiu-nwcrg-network-coding-taxonomy/ <https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-firoiu-nwcrg-network-coding-taxonomy/>

It already contains many terms and concepts that one often found in the literature.
A first question is: is it sufficient (even if not exhaustive)?

A second point is the following: I think that we also need to create links with the terminology already
used in previous RFCs that involve FEC coding. This essentially concerns the two "transport area"
RMT and FECFRAME working groups, now closed. A key document is RFC 5052
	https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/rfc5052/ <https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/rfc5052/>

One example (already agreed even if it took time ;-)) is the use of "symbol" to denote what is
called "Payload" in the "Network Coding Taxonomy" I-D. And there are derivatives:
	"source symbol" corresponds to "Original (Uncoded) Payload"
	"repair symbol" corresponds to "Coded Payload"
	"encoding symbol" corresponds to "Coded Payload or Original (Uncoded) Payload

It's important to agree on a terminology that will facilitate one day the reuse of future NWCRG
documents in other IETF working groups.

Of course discussions are more than welcome!

Cheers,

  Vincent