Re: [dtn] I-D Action: draft-ietf-dtn-tcpclv4-16.txt [AD-INT]

[Magnus Westerlund <[e-mail]>]

Rick,

It was discussed and the meetings consensus was to obsolete it. Until you have
confirmed it on the WG mailing list, it is not yet a WG consensus, so please run
that consensus call. 

Cheers

Magnus


On Wed, 2019-11-27 at 11:03 +0000, Taylor, Rick wrote:
> [ AIRBUS DEFENCE AND SPACE INTERNAL ]
> Magnus,
> 
> The consensus of the WG is to obsolete BPv6 and by extension TCPCLv3.
> 
> Let's try not to keep going around this buoy ;)
> 
> Rick
> 
> 
> 
> THIS DOCUMENT IS NOT SUBJECT TO EXPORT CONTROL.
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: dtn [mailto:[e-mail]] On Behalf Of Magnus Westerlund
> Sent: Wednesday, November 27, 2019 9:40 AM
> To: [e-mail]; [e-mail]
> Subject: Re: [dtn] I-D Action: draft-ietf-dtn-tcpclv4-16.txt
> 
> On Tue, 2019-11-26 at 19:26 +0000, Brian Sipos wrote:
> > Magnus,
> > I've asked for a SECDIR review of last changes to the draft.
> > 
> > The port assignee and contact being the IESG makes sense to me and I 
> > will update the draft to reflect this.
> > 
> > The use of two reference RFCs doesn't make sense to me, though, and I 
> > don't see any examples of this in the current IANA registry. The 
> > TCPCLv4 supersedes
> > v3 and is entity-level interoperable with v3. The RFC-TBA also 
> > references
> > RFC7242 internally, so if the IANA port registration of just RFC-TBA 
> > will allow someone to trace back to RFC7242 if they need to. Seeing 
> > one port with two separate protocol versions in the reference seems
> > confusing.
> 
> So my goal here was that there would be clear that there might be multiple
> different versions using this particular port.
> 
> What was confusing me here and lead me down the reasoning that both should be
> listed was the expectation that BPv6 and its usage of TCPclv3 would not be
> directly obsoleted, and definitely not disapear from usage. Re-reading the
> IANA section and looking at this document I think it is clear that if you
> actually go look in this docuemnt, you can figure out that TCPclv3 may also be
> used on this port. Thus, a single reference is fine with me after this
> additional consideration. 
> 
> And if we are back to having BPv7 obsolete BPv6, then I think having this
> direct obosletion is fine. If we are not having the first, this document's
> obsoletion of TCPclv3 needs another thought. I note that we have not been
> consistent in our actions due to the obsoletion discussion. 
> 
> Cheers
> 
> Magnus
> 
> 
> 
> > 
> >  From: Magnus Westerlund
> > Sent: Monday, November 25, 2019 04:27
> > To: [e-mail]; Brian Sipos
> > Subject: Re: [dtn] I-D Action: draft-ietf-dtn-tcpclv4-16.txt
> > 
> > Hi Brian,
> > 
> > Can you please try to get feedback on the update from the Secdir 
> > reviewer, or if you already have, it provide a pointer to that.
> > 
> > Anyway, looking at the update I did find an issue we need to fix. 
> > 
> > In Section 9.1 the Update to the dtn-bundle TCPCL port registration. 
> > 
> > As this is an IETF protocol now, the assigne should be:
> > 
> > IESG <[e-mail]>
> > 
> > IESG have had some discussion about the contact person and if that 
> > also should be the IESG, the WG or an individual. The argument for 
> > making it to IESG is that it likely to be more long term stable that 
> > the other options. But, this is more open to discussion, so consider 
> > what makes most sense long term and use that.
> > 
> > When it comes to references I think there is a point to list both the 
> > RFC-TBA as well as RFC7242 that defines the earlier version. But, 
> > please list RFC7242 after this docuemnt.
> > 
> > Cheers
> > 
> > Magnus
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > On Fri, 2019-11-22 at 22:18 +0000, Brian Sipos wrote:
> > > All,
> > > This latest draft of TCPCLv4 addresses comments from SECDIR review 
> > > and IANA review. It does not change any of the messaging structure, 
> > > only clarifies behaviors related to TLS use and sequencing, and 
> > > fixes some contradictory text.
> > > From: dtn <[e-mail]> on behalf of 
> > > [e-mail] < [e-mail]>
> > > Sent: Friday, November 22, 2019 17:04
> > > To: [e-mail] <[e-mail]>
> > > Cc: [e-mail] <[e-mail]>
> > > Subject: [dtn] I-D Action: draft-ietf-dtn-tcpclv4-16.txt
> > >  
> > > 
> > > A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts 
> > > directories.
> > > This draft is a work item of the Delay/Disruption Tolerant 
> > > Networking WG of the IETF.
> > > 
> > >         Title           : Delay-Tolerant Networking TCP Convergence Layer
> > > Protocol Version 4
> > >         Authors         : Brian Sipos
> > >                           Michael Demmer
> > >                           Joerg Ott
> > >                           Simon Perreault
> > >         Filename        : draft-ietf-dtn-tcpclv4-16.txt
> > >         Pages           : 63
> > >         Date            : 2019-11-22
> > > 
> > > Abstract:
> > >    This document describes a revised protocol for the TCP-based
> > >    convergence layer (TCPCL) for Delay-Tolerant Networking (DTN).  The
> > >    protocol revision is based on implementation issues in the original
> > >    TCPCL Version 3 of RFC7242 and updates to the Bundle Protocol
> > >    contents, encodings, and convergence layer requirements in Bundle
> > >    Protocol Version 7.  Specifically, the TCPCLv4 uses CBOR-encoded BPv7
> > >    bundles as its service data unit being transported and provides a
> > >    reliable transport of such bundles.  Several new IANA registries are
> > >    defined for TCPCLv4 which define some behaviors inherited from
> > >    TCPCLv3 but with updated encodings and/or semantics.
> > > 
> > > 
> > > The IETF datatracker status page for this draft is:
> > > https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-dtn-tcpclv4/
> > > 
> > > There are also htmlized versions available at:
> > > https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-dtn-tcpclv4-16
> > > https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-ietf-dtn-tcpclv4-16
> > > 
> > > A diff from the previous version is available at:
> > > https://www.ietf.org/rfcdiff?url2=draft-ietf-dtn-tcpclv4-16
> > > 
> > > 
> > > Please note that it may take a couple of minutes from the time of 
> > > submission until the htmlized version and diff are available at
> > > tools.ietf.org.
> > > 
> > > Internet-Drafts are also available by anonymous FTP at:
> > > ftp://ftp.ietf.org/internet-drafts/
> > > 
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > dtn mailing list
> > > [e-mail]
> > > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dtn
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > dtn mailing list
> > > [e-mail]
> > > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dtn
> 
> --
> Cheers
> 
> Magnus Westerlund 
> 
> 
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> Networks, Ericsson Research
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> Ericsson AB                 | Phone  [phone]
> Torshamnsgatan 23           | Mobile [phone]
> SE-164 80 Stockholm, Sweden | mailto: [e-mail]
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> 
> 
> This email and its attachments may contain confidential and/or privileged
> information.  If you have received them in error you must not use, copy or
> disclose their content to any person.  Please notify the sender immediately
> and then delete this email from your system.  This e-mail has been scanned for
> viruses, but it is the responsibility of the recipient to conduct their own
> security measures. Airbus Operations Limited is not liable for any loss or
> damage arising from the receipt or use of this e-mail.
> 
> Airbus Operations Limited, a company registered in England and Wales,
> registration number, 3468788.  Registered office:  Pegasus House, Aerospace
> Avenue, Filton, Bristol, BS34 7PA, UK.
> _______________________________________________
> dtn mailing list
> [e-mail]
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dtn
-- 
Cheers

Magnus Westerlund 


----------------------------------------------------------------------
Networks, Ericsson Research
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Ericsson AB                 | Phone  [phone]
Torshamnsgatan 23           | Mobile [phone]
SE-164 80 Stockholm, Sweden | mailto: [e-mail]
----------------------------------------------------------------------