IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [EToSat] New Version Notification for draft-kuhn-quic-4-sat-04.txt

Mirja Kuehlewind <ietf@kuehlewind.net> Fri, 24 April 2020 11:59 UTC

Return-Path: <ietf@kuehlewind.net>
X-Original-To: etosat@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: etosat@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5FA883A0B5F for <etosat@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 24 Apr 2020 04:59:24 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.897
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.897 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_NONE=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 3xBWWjVIiVfU for <etosat@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 24 Apr 2020 04:59:22 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from wp513.webpack.hosteurope.de (wp513.webpack.hosteurope.de [IPv6:2a01:488:42:1000:50ed:8223::]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id A07E23A0ADA for <etosat@ietf.org>; Fri, 24 Apr 2020 04:59:20 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from p200300dee7270100a9059d9606dd5cbd.dip0.t-ipconnect.de ([2003:de:e727:100:a905:9d96:6dd:5cbd]); authenticated by wp513.webpack.hosteurope.de running ExIM with esmtpsa (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) id 1jRwzG-0000mP-DE; Fri, 24 Apr 2020 13:59:18 +0200
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 12.4 \(3445.104.14\))
From: Mirja Kuehlewind <ietf@kuehlewind.net>
In-Reply-To: <CAKKJt-f_t-dg15G0pSZUy3N8Mie9T9xYW+hE3nh=LPzc0mUUBg@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 24 Apr 2020 13:59:17 +0200
Cc: etosat@ietf.org
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-Id: <22E249CB-1653-403A-8567-23935EDF501D@kuehlewind.net>
References: <EFFE2C3A-7D18-4559-B221-579E6737675E@huitema.net> <32C9C992-6FBD-407D-9011-4FD15364DD04@eggert.org> <CAKKJt-fm8zgWzsVeTLwAZU_mxsbWXp9MhZETS1RUzG-T_J5iZQ@mail.gmail.com> <9538E602-FFF5-4C74-A53C-E6A31ABCF3DF@eggert.org> <bc9cb433-4d42-2010-3cd9-a5ea1aea1919@huitema.net> <1131d7b3-e6b5-be0f-0dde-d23f0302d4b9@wizmail.org> <CAKKJt-f_t-dg15G0pSZUy3N8Mie9T9xYW+hE3nh=LPzc0mUUBg@mail.gmail.com>
To: Spencer Dawkins at IETF <spencerdawkins.ietf@gmail.com>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3445.104.14)
X-bounce-key: webpack.hosteurope.de;ietf@kuehlewind.net;1587729560;5c10e71a;
X-HE-SMSGID: 1jRwzG-0000mP-DE
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/etosat/FYkvvLR9GcI1lZJ7cGYjvc4h7QY>
Subject: Re: [EToSat] New Version Notification for draft-kuhn-quic-4-sat-04.txt
X-BeenThere: etosat@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: "The EToSat list is a non-WG mailing list used to discuss performance implications of running encrypted transports such as QUIC over satellite." <etosat.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/etosat>, <mailto:etosat-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/etosat/>
List-Post: <mailto:etosat@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:etosat-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/etosat>, <mailto:etosat-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 24 Apr 2020 11:59:29 -0000

Christian gave exactly this talk a little later in a tsvarea session. I think that was what he was referring to.


> On 24. Apr 2020, at 13:01, Spencer Dawkins at IETF <spencerdawkins.ietf@gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> Top posting ...
> 
> When Christian sent out his paper on implications of pluggable congestion control in user space, Mirja and I talked about having him talk about it at TSVAREA. I don't remember why that didn't happen, but ISTM that's still a really important question, and having that discussion on a non-WG mailing list for a rather narrow topic isn't going to get the attention it deserves.
> 
> Christian, do you want to ask your question on TSVAREA? If not, I'd be happy to.
> 
> Best,
> 
> Spencer
> 
> On Fri, Apr 24, 2020, 04:03 Jeremy Harris <jgh@wizmail.org> wrote:
> On 24/04/2020 00:26, Christian Huitema wrote:
> > I also have a puzzling question regarding the purpose of the tests. The
> > TCP Eval draft follows the classic approach that Internet stability
> > depends on well behaved transports, and that this good behavior should
> > be documented by a large battery of tests. I got some fairly consistent
> > feedback last year, after worrying that free wheeling innovation in
> > transport protocols might end up having bad consequences for the
> > Internet. A number of distinguished colleagues lined up at the mic and
> > explained that my fears were exaggerated, that the Internet was very
> > robust, and that I should not worry. So, which is which? Should I worry
> > about consequences for others, or is selfishness OK?
> 
> Those distinguished colleagues have forgotten, or weren't around,
> for the congestion-collapse phase of the Internet (around 1990?)
> which drove the development of congestion control.
> 
> We only have robustness because of such consideration.  Selfishness
> is not ok.
> -- 
> Cheers,
>   Jeremy
> 
> _______________________________________________
> EToSat mailing list
> EToSat@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/etosat
> _______________________________________________
> EToSat mailing list
> EToSat@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/etosat

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email