Re: [Lwip] [tcpm] [Fwd: I-D Action: draft-ietf-lwig-tcp-constrained-node-networks-04.txt]
Yoshifumi Nishida <nishida@sfc.wide.ad.jp> Mon, 29 October 2018 03:02 UTC
Return-Path: <nishida@sfc.wide.ad.jp>
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 D4C4712F1A6; Sun, 28 Oct 2018 20:02:57 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.9
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.9 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] 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 CvJ0Dj1i4b6T; Sun, 28 Oct 2018 20:02:55 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail.sfc.wide.ad.jp (mail.sfc.wide.ad.jp [IPv6:2001:200:0:8803:203:178:142:146]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 1D0A71286D9; Sun, 28 Oct 2018 20:02:54 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-oi1-f182.google.com (mail-oi1-f182.google.com [209.85.167.182]) by mail.sfc.wide.ad.jp (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 0E934278593; Mon, 29 Oct 2018 12:02:52 +0900 (JST)
Received: by mail-oi1-f182.google.com with SMTP id k64-v6so5748443oia.13; Sun, 28 Oct 2018 20:02:51 -0700 (PDT)
X-Gm-Message-State: AGRZ1gKHwoef2yTL10LA7RWzbk2OxTJojKMkA7HKsVc7HuFrL5DnH4wm 8/ob+PBAN09L8NKBuVgNHtp/MjS7/MPkB39lSUI=
X-Google-Smtp-Source: AJdET5dtDgApD09BCQHAabAPyVXQjg8lcmaEB6cSAbcPLi21hzAjBvtD3SpIlavXthqbftKKFerTaufbxReSAPUgkS0=
X-Received: by 2002:a54:4390:: with SMTP id u16-v6mr7728264oiv.186.1540782170678; Sun, 28 Oct 2018 20:02:50 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <26ed385e2f00a41e717a9d4b4043f9b9.squirrel@webmail.entel.upc.edu>
In-Reply-To: <26ed385e2f00a41e717a9d4b4043f9b9.squirrel@webmail.entel.upc.edu>
From: Yoshifumi Nishida <nishida@sfc.wide.ad.jp>
Date: Sun, 28 Oct 2018 20:02:38 -0700
X-Gmail-Original-Message-ID: <CAO249yf9bQbCY0iM4gkJbXhO-m=z2U1Vmp39ThkHjk-5xXMoMQ@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <CAO249yf9bQbCY0iM4gkJbXhO-m=z2U1Vmp39ThkHjk-5xXMoMQ@mail.gmail.com>
To: carlesgo@entel.upc.edu
Cc: "tcpm@ietf.org" <tcpm@ietf.org>, lwip@ietf.org
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/lwip/z-2jS8RrucGcb0oBNTHPDtpGIG0>
Subject: Re: [Lwip] [tcpm] [Fwd: I-D Action: draft-ietf-lwig-tcp-constrained-node-networks-04.txt]
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: Mon, 29 Oct 2018 03:02:58 -0000
Hello, I've read the draft and I think the draft looks fine and mostly ready. I have some comments below.. 1: Section 4.2.4: "In that case, RTO algorithm tuning may be considered, although careful assessment of possible drawbacks is recommended" -> It might be better if we refer draft-ietf-tcpm-rto-consider here although it is not very certain the draft will be published at this moment? It seems to me the motivation of the doc fits the situation like this. 2: Section 4.3.1: "These algorithms work efficiently for window size of at least 5 MSS" -> Just curious why this is 5? Is it because the use of delayed ack is presumed? A receiver may have a chance to send an ack for segment 1 before segment 3 arrives. 3: Section 5.3 CCN -> CNN? "This overhead could be reduced by TCP Fast Open (TFO)" -> Yes, but the use of TLS is not mandatory in this draft. If an implementation utilizes TFO, we might want to mention about app level idempotency here. "TCP keep-alive messages are not very useful to..." -> We don't need to discuss reducing the interval of keep-alive here? Thanks, -- Yoshi On Mon, Oct 8, 2018 at 10:47 PM Carles Gomez Montenegro <carlesgo@entel.upc.edu> wrote: > > Dear LWIG and TCPM WGs, > > As you can see below, we have updated the "TCP Usage Guidance in the > Internet of Things (IoT)" draft. > > This revision intends to address previously pending TODOs, as well as > comments from the LWIG session in Montreal. > > As you may recall, we are getting ready for requesting a WGLC. Your > comments will be most welcome. > > Thanks, > > Carles (on behalf of all authors) > > > ---------------------------- Original Message ---------------------------- > Subject: [Lwip] I-D Action: > draft-ietf-lwig-tcp-constrained-node-networks-04.txt > From: internet-drafts@ietf.org > Date: Tue, October 9, 2018 7:30 am > To: i-d-announce@ietf.org > Cc: lwip@ietf.org > -------------------------------------------------------------------------- > > > A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts > directories. > This draft is a work item of the Light-Weight Implementation Guidance WG > of the IETF. > > Title : TCP Usage Guidance in the Internet of Things (IoT) > Authors : Carles Gomez > Jon Crowcroft > Michael Scharf > Filename : draft-ietf-lwig-tcp-constrained-node-networks-04.txt > Pages : 25 > Date : 2018-10-08 > > Abstract: > This document provides guidance on how to implement and use the > Transmission Control Protocol (TCP) in Constrained-Node Networks > (CNNs), which are a characterstic of the Internet of Things (IoT). > Such environments require a lightweight TCP implementation and may > not make use of optional functionality. This document explains a > number of known and deployed techniques to simplify a TCP stack as > well as corresponding tradeoffs. The objective is to help embedded > developers with decisions on which TCP features to use. > > > The IETF datatracker status page for this draft is: > https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-lwig-tcp-constrained-node-networks/ > > There are also htmlized versions available at: > https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-lwig-tcp-constrained-node-networks-04 > https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-ietf-lwig-tcp-constrained-node-networks-04 > > A diff from the previous version is available at: > https://www.ietf.org/rfcdiff?url2=draft-ietf-lwig-tcp-constrained-node-networks-04 > > > Please note that it may take a couple of minutes from the time of submission > until the htmlized version and diff are available at tools.ietf.org. > > Internet-Drafts are also available by anonymous FTP at: > ftp://ftp.ietf.org/internet-drafts/ > > _______________________________________________ > Lwip mailing list > Lwip@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/lwip > > > _______________________________________________ > tcpm mailing list > tcpm@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tcpm
- [Lwip] I-D Action: draft-ietf-lwig-tcp-constraine… internet-drafts
- [Lwip] [Fwd: I-D Action: draft-ietf-lwig-tcp-cons… Carles Gomez Montenegro
- Re: [Lwip] [tcpm] [Fwd: I-D Action: draft-ietf-lw… Yoshifumi Nishida
- Re: [Lwip] [tcpm] [Fwd: I-D Action: draft-ietf-lw… Carles Gomez Montenegro
- Re: [Lwip] [tcpm] [Fwd: I-D Action: draft-ietf-lw… Scharf, Michael
- Re: [Lwip] [tcpm] [Fwd: I-D Action: draft-ietf-lw… Yoshifumi Nishida