Re: [iccrg] Disadvantages of TCP connection splitters

Joerg Deutschmann <joerg.deutschmann@fau.de> Tue, 10 March 2020 16:58 UTC

Return-Path: <joerg.deutschmann@fau.de>
X-Original-To: iccrg@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: iccrg@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id CEE513A16BB for <iccrg@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 10 Mar 2020 09:58:37 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.1
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.1 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=fau.de
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 5FyR0bMnyBZa for <iccrg@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 10 Mar 2020 09:58:32 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mx-rz-2.rrze.uni-erlangen.de (mx-rz-2.rrze.uni-erlangen.de [IPv6:2001:638:a000:1025::15]) (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 17F0D3A16C6 for <iccrg@irtf.org>; Tue, 10 Mar 2020 09:58:31 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mx-rz-smart.rrze.uni-erlangen.de (mx-rz-smart.rrze.uni-erlangen.de [IPv6:2001:638:a000:1025::1e]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mx-rz-2.rrze.uni-erlangen.de (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 48cLrf3c3JzPk5q; Tue, 10 Mar 2020 17:58:26 +0100 (CET)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=fau.de; s=fau-2013; t=1583859506; bh=lwKUxUkoel/37wvzuhkw5S2A3xFuZEin6z6bndabUZw=; h=Subject:To:References:From:Date:In-Reply-To:From:To:CC:Subject; b=DFZkTCqeckUUfHu1Vq0+r9XeKr+Jxq5mVUJI3qKh4543Nt01D6nCI7iK0FPd9cRmc KdAco6v1w+YD2tbQ6gBnbaVn5W/VFXR1+ISZNBMUAI8C6t+mrACfWYm86wN/QTWgc6 jaw86x374RTQDI6CfwPXjKvLpe0Rd0HV6G3KsYeaF6AzjpgdRDvieCuIbXr+pVTcdQ Lnr6Ouv7BB9ltu/HxH7TSxuc9TlFp+VOLT+8dR147bafRr4RvfIJuhCDrCaLBARDZ0 SOjEQAMEtGir4MPWPDdP2oyv5iCIZP0cGcfUn46oVfW0A8H8OOdogx+8brIbZQfqYS qvo9ah5y4s5GA==
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at boeck1.rrze.uni-erlangen.de (RRZE)
X-RRZE-Flag: Not-Spam
X-RRZE-Submit-IP: 131.188.37.210
Received: from faui7s0.informatik.uni-erlangen.de (faui7s0.informatik.uni-erlangen.de [131.188.37.210]) by mailhub.rrze.uni-erlangen.de (Postfix) with ESMTP id 48cLrb6BpVzPjmQ; Tue, 10 Mar 2020 17:58:23 +0100 (CET)
Received: from [10.20.13.62] (faustaff-010-020-013-062.pool.uni-erlangen.de [10.20.13.62]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by faui7s0.informatik.uni-erlangen.de (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id C5C9840F1D4C; Tue, 10 Mar 2020 17:58:23 +0100 (CET)
To: iccrg@irtf.org, michawe@ifi.uio.no
References: <7FFBC144-5F59-41BD-A47D-D4AFEFA2BE4D@ifi.uio.no>
From: Joerg Deutschmann <joerg.deutschmann@fau.de>
Message-ID: <7e67e8df-0f87-cd9d-5dda-6f3a811424af@fau.de>
Date: Tue, 10 Mar 2020 17:58:20 +0100
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:68.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/68.4.1
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <7FFBC144-5F59-41BD-A47D-D4AFEFA2BE4D@ifi.uio.no>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Language: en-US
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/iccrg/VFEaHsS3MOrlvcc6Mqu0tGq9CMk>
Subject: Re: [iccrg] Disadvantages of TCP connection splitters
X-BeenThere: iccrg@irtf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: "Discussions of Internet Congestion Control Research Group \(ICCRG\)" <iccrg.irtf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.irtf.org/mailman/options/iccrg>, <mailto:iccrg-request@irtf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/iccrg/>
List-Post: <mailto:iccrg@irtf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:iccrg-request@irtf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.irtf.org/mailman/listinfo/iccrg>, <mailto:iccrg-request@irtf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 10 Mar 2020 16:58:39 -0000

Hi,

not sure if this recent publication is interesting:
On the importance of TCP splitting proxies for future 5G mmWave communications, 2019, https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/document/9000661

(the authors are from simula Norway, so you are probably already aware of this work)

Best regards,
Joerg
 


On 10.01.20 09:54, Michael Welzl wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> I’ve been thinking a lot about TCP connection splitters lately ( https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc3135#section-2.4 ).
> 
> I’m curious: what are the real practical disadvantages of this type of PEPs that people have seen?
> I'll appreciate any kind of feedback, also anecdotes, but pointers to citable papers would be best.
> 
> BTW, let’s keep multi-path apart from this discussion please. My question is about single path TCP.
> 
> Cheers,
> Michael
> 
> PS: I’m not trying to indirectly hint that such devices would be *always good*. However, the scenarios where they are not strike me as surprisingly narrow, so I wonder if I’m missing more.
>