[6lo] recoverable fragments: should we allow the receiver to send asynchronous acks
"Pascal Thubert (pthubert)" <pthubert@cisco.com> Tue, 21 May 2019 13:01 UTC
Return-Path: <pthubert@cisco.com>
X-Original-To: 6lo@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: 6lo@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 699C7120118 for <6lo@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 21 May 2019 06:01:53 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -14.5
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-14.5 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, SPF_PASS=-0.001, USER_IN_DEF_DKIM_WL=-7.5] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=cisco.com header.b=IPwSD2u/; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=cisco.onmicrosoft.com header.b=GBOcOZgO
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id f5VClr8VD3tq for <6lo@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 21 May 2019 06:01:50 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from rcdn-iport-8.cisco.com (rcdn-iport-8.cisco.com [173.37.86.79]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher DHE-RSA-SEED-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 770571200B8 for <6lo@ietf.org>; Tue, 21 May 2019 06:01:50 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=cisco.com; i=@cisco.com; l=3492; q=dns/txt; s=iport; t=1558443710; x=1559653310; h=from:to:subject:date:message-id:mime-version; bh=xWVOygxQ9P7Yr+ASzWv3MRPClpikTiHGhI6d+TyF7wo=; b=IPwSD2u/HB3qVGYgogTzCbzmIcv2/tPOVR3LGfZ2cUIlP5mTnwE3w/aO mNCxKVIfad3da1jqeUbsR5IV8DRkA4Ih+tA7M37lUeQp8Z+i52l/3mAD3 5V/qIsin0cmzdw+vY7KxTTFed/frwb6/FTPO5UDtvIsZFnw6zBfQU6tYJ c=;
IronPort-PHdr: 9a23:v4cr/B31s9XdZNNOsmDT+zVfbzU7u7jyIg8e44YmjLQLaKm44pD+JxKGt+51ggrPWoPWo7JfhuzavrqoeFRI4I3J8RVgOIdJSwdDjMwXmwI6B8vQEVH7MfTndTASF8VZX1gj9Ha+YgBY
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: A0BwAAC19eNc/4gNJK1lHAEBAQQBAQcEAQGBUgYBAQsBgQ4vUANpVSAECyiHWgOOdJIzgn2EToEuFIEQA1QJAQEBDAEBLQIBAYRAAoImIzUIDgEDAQEEAQECAQRtHAyFYxsTAQE4EQEMdCYBBAEaGoMBgR1NAx0BAptWAoE1iF+CIIJ5AQEFhQYYgg8JgTQBi1AXgUA/gVeCTD6EDDqDOoImkliVTwkCgg2MboYtliyMVpVIAgQCBAUCDgEBBYFRATWBV3AVgyeCD4NvilNygSmNEwEB
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.60,495,1549929600"; d="scan'208,217";a="560422456"
Received: from alln-core-3.cisco.com ([173.36.13.136]) by rcdn-iport-8.cisco.com with ESMTP/TLS/DHE-RSA-SEED-SHA; 21 May 2019 13:01:47 +0000
Received: from XCH-ALN-020.cisco.com (xch-aln-020.cisco.com [173.36.7.30]) by alln-core-3.cisco.com (8.15.2/8.15.2) with ESMTPS id x4LD1l0Q004869 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=FAIL); Tue, 21 May 2019 13:01:47 GMT
Received: from xhs-aln-001.cisco.com (173.37.135.118) by XCH-ALN-020.cisco.com (173.36.7.30) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.0.1473.3; Tue, 21 May 2019 08:01:46 -0500
Received: from xhs-rcd-003.cisco.com (173.37.227.248) by xhs-aln-001.cisco.com (173.37.135.118) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.0.1473.3; Tue, 21 May 2019 08:01:46 -0500
Received: from NAM04-BN3-obe.outbound.protection.outlook.com (72.163.14.9) by xhs-rcd-003.cisco.com (173.37.227.248) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.0.1473.3 via Frontend Transport; Tue, 21 May 2019 08:01:46 -0500
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=cisco.onmicrosoft.com; s=selector2-cisco-onmicrosoft-com; h=From:Date:Subject:Message-ID:Content-Type:MIME-Version:X-MS-Exchange-SenderADCheck; bh=rLhV1UiuXBaKyx2g6LW6GWht//UyqcTN7eDy4Nbg4hY=; b=GBOcOZgOcioTFVh2QEEXKW512BQpRjtDGKUDSBh8gUqSSvZQNFMTcu42PKs4ff4tc7y3acqAuY3YZyEDQ1LXF5s/wMcbUAQ9xpqItuOr/ajxBSiA3m/9egX1KMfKo33LKSrEuIAGCdDn9e0kfqt/tu7Fc49fKaazwlAAOeurYGQ=
Received: from MN2PR11MB3565.namprd11.prod.outlook.com (20.178.250.159) by MN2PR11MB3757.namprd11.prod.outlook.com (20.178.253.139) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384) id 15.20.1900.17; Tue, 21 May 2019 13:01:46 +0000
Received: from MN2PR11MB3565.namprd11.prod.outlook.com ([fe80::7cc2:b440:8820:f0fc]) by MN2PR11MB3565.namprd11.prod.outlook.com ([fe80::7cc2:b440:8820:f0fc%7]) with mapi id 15.20.1900.020; Tue, 21 May 2019 13:01:46 +0000
From: "Pascal Thubert (pthubert)" <pthubert@cisco.com>
To: "6lo@ietf.org" <6lo@ietf.org>, Laurent Toutain <laurent.toutain@imt-atlantique.fr>
Thread-Topic: recoverable fragments: should we allow the receiver to send asynchronous acks
Thread-Index: AdUO3G4zBQUa5EeXT1OpTniyGXZZXA==
Date: Tue, 21 May 2019 13:01:32 +0000
Deferred-Delivery: Tue, 21 May 2019 13:01:16 +0000
Message-ID: <MN2PR11MB3565E2D4B50B123AEE7BBB8FD8070@MN2PR11MB3565.namprd11.prod.outlook.com>
Accept-Language: fr-FR, en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
authentication-results: spf=none (sender IP is ) smtp.mailfrom=pthubert@cisco.com;
x-originating-ip: [2001:420:44f3:1300:552f:ff32:b86:aad7]
x-ms-publictraffictype: Email
x-ms-office365-filtering-correlation-id: 7adc2a2c-7a82-4411-9aeb-08d6ddec7abd
x-microsoft-antispam: BCL:0; PCL:0; RULEID:(2390118)(7020095)(4652040)(8989299)(4534185)(4627221)(201703031133081)(201702281549075)(8990200)(5600141)(711020)(4605104)(2017052603328)(7193020); SRVR:MN2PR11MB3757;
x-ms-traffictypediagnostic: MN2PR11MB3757:
x-ms-exchange-purlcount: 2
x-microsoft-antispam-prvs: <MN2PR11MB3757760AA87A61E9F34978C7D8070@MN2PR11MB3757.namprd11.prod.outlook.com>
x-ms-oob-tlc-oobclassifiers: OLM:7219;
x-forefront-prvs: 0044C17179
x-forefront-antispam-report: SFV:NSPM; SFS:(10009020)(366004)(396003)(376002)(39860400002)(346002)(136003)(199004)(189003)(64756008)(76116006)(73956011)(66946007)(66446008)(66476007)(66556008)(46003)(7696005)(316002)(2906002)(110136005)(99286004)(71200400001)(71190400001)(186003)(6506007)(6116002)(256004)(33656002)(790700001)(6666004)(102836004)(74316002)(478600001)(4744005)(68736007)(7736002)(52536014)(5660300002)(14454004)(9686003)(81166006)(486006)(54896002)(6306002)(25786009)(8676002)(8936002)(476003)(53936002)(6436002)(55016002)(2501003)(86362001)(81156014); DIR:OUT; SFP:1101; SCL:1; SRVR:MN2PR11MB3757; H:MN2PR11MB3565.namprd11.prod.outlook.com; FPR:; SPF:None; LANG:en; PTR:InfoNoRecords; A:1; MX:1;
received-spf: None (protection.outlook.com: cisco.com does not designate permitted sender hosts)
x-ms-exchange-senderadcheck: 1
x-microsoft-antispam-message-info: 24YP86c4SQXVYtTKcOSmP4qmXKAjjuPfRn9JWSJqJfgVn5Qpv/Yatlr8Lj7yWbjqUkopDiqvB0cSeS8Thl+ycJKC5xgyVzGULnGP0verYntKwGMzxcrYsoLXkZ9enYoERAnk59b3BUUTIfLHW5pFHrGox76SeqOHGYhaEfP0xzhu4dZxvn8x90/gwmYrrS+eYXMXLsr+gQbvLhkbJwqYrGyfk4S8AITbhXQBWfziQ1ASRP0J2V78yiKnLEhI3io64hy0MJsFuzoGRc+V9hw+BMygKV5KRt/C2SmLKSs/UDonphkaTNAJkrdw6H4jGAKlUBj+en9vu9H7VU3vkRqFP6IasJPHnSibhOrfJLEAAvTsUkd4OTc3zjp6ZxsTpHf8lrX7y3CNPl2SnNYcBUZy+CI4jGFFWYZFw3wplu3I53o=
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="_000_MN2PR11MB3565E2D4B50B123AEE7BBB8FD8070MN2PR11MB3565namp_"
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-Network-Message-Id: 7adc2a2c-7a82-4411-9aeb-08d6ddec7abd
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-originalarrivaltime: 21 May 2019 13:01:45.9681 (UTC)
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-fromentityheader: Hosted
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-id: 5ae1af62-9505-4097-a69a-c1553ef7840e
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-mailboxtype: HOSTED
X-MS-Exchange-Transport-CrossTenantHeadersStamped: MN2PR11MB3757
X-OriginatorOrg: cisco.com
X-Outbound-SMTP-Client: 173.36.7.30, xch-aln-020.cisco.com
X-Outbound-Node: alln-core-3.cisco.com
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/6lo/D_Sirn6gPMfkyZ3ODjZt8I3RvY4>
Subject: [6lo] recoverable fragments: should we allow the receiver to send asynchronous acks
X-BeenThere: 6lo@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: "Mailing list for the 6lo WG for Internet Area issues in IPv6 over constrained node networks." <6lo.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/6lo>, <mailto:6lo-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/6lo/>
List-Post: <mailto:6lo@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:6lo-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/6lo>, <mailto:6lo-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 21 May 2019 13:01:54 -0000
Dear all: During the review by Laurent, a question came up on whether the receiver could asynchronously send RFRAG Acks e.g., to transport an ECN indication. At the moment, the sender is in full control and the ack is only sent if the sender asks for it. Laurent indicates that asynchronous Ack could generate more collisions and make the problem worse. What do you all think? Pascal
- [6lo] recoverable fragments: should we allow the … Pascal Thubert (pthubert)
- Re: [6lo] recoverable fragments: should we allow … Michael Richardson
- Re: [6lo] recoverable fragments: should we allow … Pascal Thubert (pthubert)