IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: Is round-trip time no longer a concern?

Tony Finch <dot@dotat.at> Mon, 20 February 2006 17:10 UTC

Received: from [127.0.0.1] (helo=stiedprmman1.va.neustar.com) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1FBEYg-0006TI-74; Mon, 20 Feb 2006 12:10:46 -0500
Received: from [10.91.34.44] (helo=ietf-mx.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1FBEYf-0006T8-1h; Mon, 20 Feb 2006 12:10:45 -0500
Received: from ppsw-7.csi.cam.ac.uk ([131.111.8.137]) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1FBEYc-0005Xm-Oj; Mon, 20 Feb 2006 12:10:45 -0500
X-Cam-SpamDetails: Not scanned
X-Cam-AntiVirus: No virus found
X-Cam-ScannerInfo: http://www.cam.ac.uk/cs/email/scanner/
Received: from hermes-2.csi.cam.ac.uk ([131.111.8.54]:49334) by ppsw-7.csi.cam.ac.uk (smtp.hermes.cam.ac.uk [131.111.8.157]:25) with esmtpa (EXTERNAL:fanf2) id 1FBEYK-0006yC-PI (Exim 4.54) (return-path <fanf2@hermes.cam.ac.uk>); Mon, 20 Feb 2006 17:10:24 +0000
Received: from fanf2 (helo=localhost) by hermes-2.csi.cam.ac.uk (hermes.cam.ac.uk) with local-esmtp id 1FBEYK-00080T-PN (Exim 4.53) (return-path <fanf2@hermes.cam.ac.uk>); Mon, 20 Feb 2006 17:10:24 +0000
Date: Mon, 20 Feb 2006 17:10:24 +0000
From: Tony Finch <dot@dotat.at>
X-X-Sender: fanf2@hermes-2.csi.cam.ac.uk
To: Dave Cridland <dave@cridland.net>
In-Reply-To: <24385.1140452426.167543@peirce.dave.cridland.net>
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.64.0602201707300.24112@hermes-2.csi.cam.ac.uk>
References: <20060219013238.779CC22241D@laser.networkresonance.com> <43F8FE0F.3060309@dcrocker.net> <24385.1140426803.565678@peirce.dave.cridland.net> <868xs6kqno.fsf@raman.networkresonance.com> <24385.1140452426.167543@peirce.dave.cridland.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset="US-ASCII"
X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/)
X-Scan-Signature: 856eb5f76e7a34990d1d457d8e8e5b7f
Cc: iesg@ietf.org, IETF-Discussion <ietf@ietf.org>, Dave Crocker <dcrocker@bbiw.net>
Subject: Re: Is round-trip time no longer a concern?
X-BeenThere: ietf@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5
Precedence: list
List-Id: IETF-Discussion <ietf.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf>, <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Post: <mailto:ietf@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf>, <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
Errors-To: ietf-bounces@ietf.org

On Mon, 20 Feb 2006, Dave Cridland wrote:
>
> For IMAP, where connection setup time is, in principle, a very small part of
> the total session time, it seems odd you're advocating that nobody should
> worry about adding round-trips when there's been substantial effort in
> reducing round-trips in precisely this area. Witness the way that the
> CAPABILITY command has been deprecated into a CAPABILITY response code, or the
> SASL-IR proposal, or RECONNECT - the list just goes on.

A good way of saving a couple of RTTs is to use imaps rather than
imap+STARTTLS. It's a pity that the equivalent for message submission
has been rescinded, despite the fact that it's still widely used.

Tony.
-- 
f.a.n.finch  <dot@dotat.at>  http://dotat.at/
BISCAY: WEST 5 OR 6 BECOMING VARIABLE 3 OR 4. SHOWERS AT FIRST. MODERATE OR
GOOD.

_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf@ietf.org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email