IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: What is the long term plan for Internet evolution?

Kent Watsen <kent@watsen.net> Wed, 30 June 2021 00:57 UTC

Return-Path: <0100017a5a6c13e7-53cfcee8-b8dd-45b1-9a26-f30f497db3a9-000000@amazonses.watsen.net>
X-Original-To: ietf@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ietf@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A3EA03A0E4C for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 29 Jun 2021 17:57:57 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.894
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.894 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_BLOCKED=0.001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3=0.001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_NONE=0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=amazonses.com
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 SCbtSSxfvCC9 for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 29 Jun 2021 17:57:52 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from a8-31.smtp-out.amazonses.com (a8-31.smtp-out.amazonses.com [54.240.8.31]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 119E53A0FB3 for <ietf@ietf.org>; Tue, 29 Jun 2021 17:57:51 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/simple; s=ug7nbtf4gccmlpwj322ax3p6ow6yfsug; d=amazonses.com; t=1625014670; h=Content-Type:Mime-Version:Subject:From:In-Reply-To:Date:Cc:Content-Transfer-Encoding:Message-Id:References:To:Feedback-ID; bh=UrN7GWTncn3+rWkOLZbytCK/eLJ2AqkMcKPo6w8q9JA=; b=GBciogTEhddHJpDzV007PJxU/7H1waDUjewJ/RhAGaehQH6FzuKqwidEyonuEvla v1igzW3LmNB6P3fyWcfI6/JPKN91qyoLwtY9Rd0FW9DzJvjyKjR5Or76iskq8GmdVUi HDpZN3pjHuOZdPsEeEmu5vV8LIiJ5Kj1AMkyuWEg=
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 14.0 \(3654.100.0.2.22\))
Subject: Re: What is the long term plan for Internet evolution?
From: Kent Watsen <kent@watsen.net>
In-Reply-To: <16008.1625010713@localhost>
Date: Wed, 30 Jun 2021 00:57:50 +0000
Cc: Phillip Hallam-Baker <phill@hallambaker.com>, IETF Discussion Mailing List <ietf@ietf.org>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-ID: <0100017a5a6c13e7-53cfcee8-b8dd-45b1-9a26-f30f497db3a9-000000@email.amazonses.com>
References: <CAMm+LwiFajxuV3E_u7b-f=7DqTHXG_4Y=VLoCsUxknD_mCp1=Q@mail.gmail.com> <00722e06-a385-251c-d95d-2ff67e83f5c1@foobar.org> <CAMm+LwgwwX4zhqqH27FtBEyKRn74BdunswpembR_O6R34vTuSA@mail.gmail.com> <16008.1625010713@localhost>
To: Michael Richardson <mcr+ietf@sandelman.ca>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3654.100.0.2.22)
Feedback-ID: 1.us-east-1.DKmIRZFhhsBhtmFMNikgwZUWVrODEw9qVcPhqJEI2DA=:AmazonSES
X-SES-Outgoing: 2021.06.30-54.240.8.31
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ietf/_ynUGW96XHZ0vvoNAJfcE5vH4kM>
X-BeenThere: ietf@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: IETF-Discussion <ietf.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/ietf>, <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/ietf/>
List-Post: <mailto:ietf@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf>, <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 30 Jun 2021 00:57:58 -0000

NETCONF Subscribed Notifications (RFC 8639) over HTTP/2 also does this.

K.


> On Jun 29, 2021, at 7:51 PM, Michael Richardson <mcr+ietf@sandelman.ca> wrote:
> 
> 
> Phillip Hallam-Baker <phill@hallambaker.com> wrote:
>> That is what a transaction is, right. Nope. Many of my transactions have
>> people in the middle of them making decisions or big compute loads. So in
>> the HTTP world we end up with
> 
>> < C:Request, S:Ack, [C:Poll, S:Pending,] * C:Poll, S: Response>
> 
>> That is plain ugly. The pattern I really want is:
> 
>> < C:Request, S:Ack, S: Response>
> 
>> There is no need to poll, just respond when finished. That might be
>> seconds, minutes, days or even years.
> 
> CoAP supports this.
> 
>> For telemetry, the pattern I want is
> 
>> < C:Config, S:Data, S:Data, S:Data, S:Data, S:Data, C:Config, S:Data,
>> S:Data, ...>
> 
>> Again, this just doesn't fit onto the TCP or HTTP communication patterns
>> and it is not really something QUIC is designed for. Sure we could make do.
>> But I choose not to.
> 
> CoAP Observe does this.
> CoAP works better without NAT because the NAT closes the subsequent S:Data in
> many cases.
> 
> --
> Michael Richardson <mcr+IETF@sandelman.ca>   . o O ( IPv6 IøT consulting )
>           Sandelman Software Works Inc, Ottawa and Worldwide
> 
> 
> 
>

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email