From nobody Thu Feb 18 08:29:29 2021 Return-Path: X-Original-To: core@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: core@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 632733A1405 for ; Thu, 18 Feb 2021 08:29:28 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.899 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.899 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no 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 655i5Z9sRe_B for ; Thu, 18 Feb 2021 08:29:22 -0800 (PST) Received: from mail.jpshallow.com (mail.jpshallow.com [217.40.240.153]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 84E853A13EA for ; Thu, 18 Feb 2021 08:29:22 -0800 (PST) Received: from mail2.jpshallow.com ([192.168.0.3] helo=N01332) by mail.jpshallow.com with esmtp (Exim 4.92.3) (envelope-from ) id 1lCjCt-0005KZ-7A; Thu, 18 Feb 2021 13:18:59 +0000 From: To: , Cc: , , References: <23740_1612339780_601A5A44_23740_98_8_787AE7BB302AE849A7480A190F8B9330315C6374@OPEXCAUBMA2.corporate.adroot.infra.ftgroup> <28095_1608732578_5FE34FA2_28095_105_1_787AE7BB302AE849A7480A190F8B9330315A1C90@OPEXCAUBMA2.corporate.adroot.infra.ftgroup> In-Reply-To: Date: Thu, 18 Feb 2021 13:19:02 -0000 Message-ID: <004401d705f8$a0333de0$e099b9a0$@jpshallow.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook 14.0 Thread-Index: AQKB62JphLL4G1Ld1UlfNpXpEuFZPqkIBQCQ Content-Language: en-gb Archived-At: Subject: Re: [core] WG Last Call on draft-ietf-core-new-block (No-Response) X-BeenThere: core@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: "Constrained RESTful Environments \(CoRE\) Working Group list" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 18 Feb 2021 16:29:28 -0000 Hi Christian, We have gone with adding to Section 1.1 " The No-Response Option was considered but was abandoned as it does not apply to Q-Block2 responses. A unified solution is defined in the = document." Regards Jon > -----Original Message----- > From: Christian M. Ams=FCss [mailto:christian@amsuess.com] > Sent: 16 February 2021 23:54 > To: mohamed.boucadair@orange.com > Cc: draft-ietf-core-new-block@ietf.org; dots@ietf.org; core@ietf.org = WG > (core@ietf.org) > Subject: Re: [core] WG Last Call on draft-ietf-core-new-block (No-Response) >=20 > Hello Med, >=20 > On Wed, Feb 03, 2021 at 08:09:40AM +0000, mohamed.boucadair@orange.com > wrote: > > As a follow-up on this issue, we finally went with an approach that > > does not require No-Response. We do have the following to avoid = extra > > delays, e.g., >=20 > The need to indicate when a client wants confirmation has been avoided = by > having timeouts on both sides, and relying more on MAX_PAYLOADS being > aligned. >=20 > For my taste, that makes unnecessary sacrifices in robustness over the simple > two-byte NoResponse:0 that'd go with every MAX_PAYLOADS'th > Q-Block2 from the client (and would completey avoid the risk of = stalling in a > lossless situation). >=20 > (For the other direction, corective heuristics can easily be applied). >=20 > But given they are explicitly configured in the DOTS case where = Q-Block is used, > so -- well. Food for a block-bis (or generalized additions that allow block to be > used that way). >=20 >=20 > That aside, in the interest of readers who try to understand the = ecosystem and > the trade-offs involved, I think that at least a reference to it in a statement like > "was not chosen because of X" would be helpful. The "Note that similar > performance benefits" section would lend itself to that. Text = suggestion: >=20 > [messages are provided in Appendix A.] Similarly, The No-Response = option > can be applied to Block1 requests, but offers no corresponding = facility > for Block2 responses. >=20 > BR > c >=20 > -- > To use raw power is to make yourself infinitely vulnerable to greater powers. > -- Bene Gesserit axiom