IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [Last-Call] [Gen-art] Genart last call review of draft-ietf-quic-applicability-14

Lars Eggert <lars@eggert.org> Tue, 19 April 2022 17:24 UTC

Return-Path: <lars@eggert.org>
X-Original-To: last-call@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: last-call@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id CE1F33A0C09; Tue, 19 Apr 2022 10:24:11 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.108
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.108 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, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_BLOCKED=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_SCC_BODY_TEXT_LINE=-0.01, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=eggert.org
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 LtgYfwE-ydjB; Tue, 19 Apr 2022 10:24:07 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail.eggert.org (mail.eggert.org [91.190.195.94]) (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 3C8B13A0BFF; Tue, 19 Apr 2022 10:23:59 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from smtpclient.apple (unknown [IPv6:2a00:ac00:4000:400:9180:dfcf:fc10:7f39]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail.eggert.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id F2A3B1DAB5C; Tue, 19 Apr 2022 20:23:48 +0300 (EEST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=eggert.org; s=dkim; t=1650389029; bh=MCb74WK5+QWbJpfgSwTsKkV3m/sf25FvmPXuHkLGV58=; h=Subject:From:In-Reply-To:Date:Cc:References:To; b=tyGqA5p00kNfHAUYbFQSchvFfmPwyGTne9nhqkyi8KWNd2fTIQ+PX1julsPc1cXMT QR+uraoZjMbD6zXtPetuROGbZWuYhow6wqfdvZrg0YXYfsnFtPGr8W6DpZ2Won6Yqi 44Dz98B/anVPBEvzMha0PK+GljlxgYFbdf7mQEJU=
Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="Apple-Mail=_D62B6396-1F1D-4803-9F56-99002301D603"; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; micalg=pgp-sha512
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 16.0 \(3696.80.82.1.1\))
From: Lars Eggert <lars@eggert.org>
In-Reply-To: <164427862240.3893.14553480515020040830@ietfa.amsl.com>
Date: Tue, 19 Apr 2022 20:23:48 +0300
Cc: General Area Review Team <gen-art@ietf.org>, draft-ietf-quic-applicability.all@ietf.org, last-call@ietf.org, quic@ietf.org
Message-Id: <9DBB9BE9-87F9-489D-AAE7-B6EAFF398975@eggert.org>
References: <164427862240.3893.14553480515020040830@ietfa.amsl.com>
To: Ines Robles <mariainesrobles@googlemail.com>
X-MailScanner-ID: F2A3B1DAB5C.A64F4
X-MailScanner: Not scanned: please contact your Internet E-Mail Service Provider for details
X-MailScanner-From: lars@eggert.org
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/last-call/yavwDUFMil_WN42B-V8vcgkB3GI>
Subject: Re: [Last-Call] [Gen-art] Genart last call review of draft-ietf-quic-applicability-14
X-BeenThere: last-call@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: IETF Last Calls <last-call.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/last-call>, <mailto:last-call-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/last-call/>
List-Post: <mailto:last-call@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:last-call-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/last-call>, <mailto:last-call-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 19 Apr 2022 17:24:12 -0000

Ines, thank you for your review. I have entered a No Objection ballot for this document.

Lars


> On 2022-2-8, at 2:03, Ines Robles via Datatracker <noreply@ietf.org> wrote:
> 
> Reviewer: Ines Robles
> Review result: Ready with Issues
> 
> I am the assigned Gen-ART reviewer for this draft. The General Area
> Review Team (Gen-ART) reviews all IETF documents being processed
> by the IESG for the IETF Chair.  Please treat these comments just
> like any other last call comments.
> 
> For more information, please see the FAQ at
> 
> <https://trac.ietf.org/trac/gen/wiki/GenArtfaq>.
> 
> Document: draft-ietf-quic-applicability-14
> Reviewer: Ines Robles
> Review Date: 2022-02-07
> IETF LC End Date: 2022-02-07
> IESG Telechat date: Not scheduled for a telechat
> 
> Summary:
> 
> This document discusses the applicability of the QUIC transport protocol,
> focusing on caveats impacting application protocol  development and deployment
> over QUIC.  The document is well written and clear.
> 
> I have one minor issue.
> 
> Major issues: None
> 
> Minor issues:
> 
> Section 2 on the sentence:
> 
> "While recent measurements have shown no evidence of a widespread,  systematic
> disadvantage of UDP traffic compared to TCP in the Internet"
> 
> Statement of "no evidence of a widespread,  systematic disadvantage" may be
> seen as misleading when the example is about networks that simply block UDP
> traffic without considering other possible disadvantages, moreover when one of
> the references specifically states the opposite "3% failure is a lot".
> Additionally references are rather old (2016) materials. Suggestion for
> avoidance of doubt:
> 
> "Measurements have shown 3-5% of networks blocking UDP, constituting a
> disadvantage of UDP traffic compared to TCP in the Internet [Edeline16],
> [Trammell16] [Swett16].  All applications running on top of QUIC must
> therefore..."
> 
> Nits: None
> 
> Thanks for this document,
> Ines.
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Gen-art mailing list
> Gen-art@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/gen-art

v2.8.7 | Report a Bug | By Email