IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [Lwip] Review of draft-ietf-lwig-tcp-constrained-node-networks-04

Ilpo Järvinen <ilpo.jarvinen@cs.helsinki.fi> Wed, 28 August 2019 11:53 UTC

Return-Path: <ilpo.jarvinen@cs.helsinki.fi>
X-Original-To: lwip@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: lwip@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7DFDD12011D; Wed, 28 Aug 2019 04:53:51 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.734
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.734 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_ADSP_ALL=0.8, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_SOFTFAIL=0.665] 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 CMMqu8R7GXXl; Wed, 28 Aug 2019 04:53:49 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from smtp-rs2-vallila1.fe.helsinki.fi (smtp-rs2-vallila1.fe.helsinki.fi [128.214.173.73]) (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 17D89120114; Wed, 28 Aug 2019 04:53:48 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from whs-18.cs.helsinki.fi (whs-18.cs.helsinki.fi [128.214.166.46]) by smtp-rs2.it.helsinki.fi (8.14.7/8.14.7) with ESMTP id x7SBrb6r035546; Wed, 28 Aug 2019 14:53:37 +0300
Received: by whs-18.cs.helsinki.fi (Postfix, from userid 1070048) id 2587336013E; Wed, 28 Aug 2019 14:53:37 +0300 (EEST)
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by whs-18.cs.helsinki.fi (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1F36636007C; Wed, 28 Aug 2019 14:53:37 +0300 (EEST)
Date: Wed, 28 Aug 2019 14:53:37 +0300
From: Ilpo Järvinen <ilpo.jarvinen@cs.helsinki.fi>
X-X-Sender: ijjarvin@whs-18.cs.helsinki.fi
To: Mohit Sethi M <mohit.m.sethi@ericsson.com>
cc: Carles Gomez Montenegro <carlesgo@entel.upc.edu>, "lwip@ietf.org" <lwip@ietf.org>, "tcpm@ietf.org" <tcpm@ietf.org>, "jon.crowcroft@cl.cam.ac.uk" <jon.crowcroft@cl.cam.ac.uk>, "kojo@cs.helsinki.fi" <kojo@cs.helsinki.fi>
In-Reply-To: <bdb83140-4bc1-dd45-1a5e-e5f4e23c638f@ericsson.com>
Message-ID: <alpine.DEB.2.20.1908281435330.18955@whs-18.cs.helsinki.fi>
References: <alpine.DEB.2.20.1811071352180.14868@whs-18.cs.helsinki.fi> <c9a84f24e05fd1b433cf22fe742857c5.squirrel@webmail.entel.upc.edu> <alpine.DEB.2.20.1904261602000.23031@whs-18.cs.helsinki.fi> <184404a792aadb06ac772ffe05bc3233.squirrel@webmail.entel.upc.edu> <bdb83140-4bc1-dd45-1a5e-e5f4e23c638f@ericsson.com>
User-Agent: Alpine 2.20 (DEB 67 2015-01-07)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/lwip/FDbGvo_rmcZl1rz1iPoxnHxN3OE>
Subject: Re: [Lwip] Review of draft-ietf-lwig-tcp-constrained-node-networks-04
X-BeenThere: lwip@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: "Lightweight IP stack. Official mailing list for IETF LWIG Working Group." <lwip.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/lwip>, <mailto:lwip-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/lwip/>
List-Post: <mailto:lwip@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:lwip-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/lwip>, <mailto:lwip-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 28 Aug 2019 11:53:52 -0000

On Fri, 23 Aug 2019, Mohit Sethi M wrote:

> Hi Ilpo and Markku,
> 
> Could you confirm that -08 version of the draft addresses all your 
> concerns. We will then send it to the IESG for review.

For me, no major concerns remaining. A few minor points from the text 
edited in -08.

The "pure ACK" might be better to write open, e.g., "ACK without
payload".

The current text in FR/FR scenario with 1-6 segment might confuse as
the sixth segment is only sent out on the first (duplicate) ACK. The 
current wording makes it to sound as if 1-6 would be outstanding right
at the beginning (instead of first 1-5 and then 2-6 after the ACK).

"plus two additional segments for each one of the first two duplicate 
ACKs."
I think this might be misinterpreted to mean 2*2 segments.



-- 
 i.

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email