Re: [middisc] middisc specification update

"Eddy, Wesley M. (GRC-MS00)[ASRC AEROSPACE CORP]" <wesley.m.eddy@nasa.gov> Mon, 05 March 2012 19:19 UTC

Return-Path: <wesley.m.eddy@nasa.gov>
X-Original-To: middisc@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: middisc@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D0E3C21F891A for <middisc@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 5 Mar 2012 11:19:23 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -106.599
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-106.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id OMjO82riwy9a for <middisc@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 5 Mar 2012 11:19:23 -0800 (PST)
Received: from ndjsnpf01.ndc.nasa.gov (ndjsnpf01.ndc.nasa.gov [198.117.1.121]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id DAC3B21F8907 for <middisc@ietf.org>; Mon, 5 Mar 2012 11:19:22 -0800 (PST)
Received: from ndjsppt04.ndc.nasa.gov (ndjsppt04.ndc.nasa.gov [198.117.1.103]) by ndjsnpf01.ndc.nasa.gov (Postfix) with ESMTP id 68D47328492; Mon, 5 Mar 2012 13:19:22 -0600 (CST)
Received: from ndjshub03.ndc.nasa.gov (ndjshub03-pub.ndc.nasa.gov [198.117.1.33]) by ndjsppt04.ndc.nasa.gov (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id q25JJMq7028635; Mon, 5 Mar 2012 13:19:22 -0600
Received: from NDJSSCC01.ndc.nasa.gov ([198.117.4.166]) by ndjshub03.ndc.nasa.gov ([10.202.202.162]) with mapi; Mon, 5 Mar 2012 13:19:22 -0600
From: "Eddy, Wesley M. (GRC-MS00)[ASRC AEROSPACE CORP]" <wesley.m.eddy@nasa.gov>
To: "Anantha Ramaiah (ananth)" <ananth@cisco.com>, David Harrington <ietfdbh@comcast.net>, Wesley Eddy <wes@mti-systems.com>, "middisc@ietf.org" <middisc@ietf.org>
Date: Mon, 05 Mar 2012 13:19:21 -0600
Thread-Topic: [middisc] middisc specification update
Thread-Index: AcyG5wLVJKtf0Y74SiSodjFq7qJ2lxObcJ+QAAJE5sAI3dxCQACKW9EQAABRXxAAAH7XAA==
Message-ID: <C304DB494AC0C04C87C6A6E2FF5603DB5ACE4EFC02@NDJSSCC01.ndc.nasa.gov>
References: <4E9241F7.5090406@mti-systems.com><2AE215BDC76842F885AC7E9D34BD2CA4@davidPC><0C53DCFB700D144284A584F54711EC580E546254@xmb-sjc-21c.amer.cisco.com> <0C53DCFB700D144284A584F54711EC580EA21847@xmb-sjc-21c.amer.cisco.com> <C304DB494AC0C04C87C6A6E2FF5603DB5ACE4EFBB5@NDJSSCC01.ndc.nasa.gov> <0C53DCFB700D144284A584F54711EC580EA21B2D@xmb-sjc-21c.amer.cisco.com>
In-Reply-To: <0C53DCFB700D144284A584F54711EC580EA21B2D@xmb-sjc-21c.amer.cisco.com>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
acceptlanguage: en-US
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Proofpoint-Virus-Version: vendor=fsecure engine=2.50.10432:5.6.7498, 1.0.260, 0.0.0000 definitions=2012-03-05_05:2012-03-05, 2012-03-05, 1970-01-01 signatures=0
Subject: Re: [middisc] middisc specification update
X-BeenThere: middisc@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
List-Id: "Discussions on TCP option for middlebox discovery." <middisc.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/middisc>, <mailto:middisc-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/middisc>
List-Post: <mailto:middisc@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:middisc-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/middisc>, <mailto:middisc-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 05 Mar 2012 19:19:23 -0000

Since we want vendors to move off of other codepoints and onto
whatever one may be allocated for this, I think Informational
may not be quite right.

Experimental could capture this well.  We want vendors to
implement it and try it out.  The "experiment" is really to
see if people will use this or not, and whether it succeeds in
relieving some of the chaos of unallocated options in use.  I
think this would also require making sure there's clear
discussion in the document of why the existing experimental
codepoints aren't felt to be sufficient for this (especially
since one has already been successfully used by one vendor!).




>-----Original Message-----
>From: Anantha Ramaiah (ananth) [mailto:ananth@cisco.com]
>Sent: Monday, March 05, 2012 1:57 PM
>To: Eddy, Wesley M. (GRC-MS00)[ASRC AEROSPACE CORP]; David Harrington;
>Wesley Eddy; middisc@ietf.org
>Subject: RE: [middisc] middisc specification update
>
>Wes,
>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Eddy, Wesley M. (GRC-MS00)[ASRC AEROSPACE CORP]
>> [mailto:wesley.m.eddy@nasa.gov]
>> Sent: Monday, March 05, 2012 10:42 AM
>> To: Anantha Ramaiah (ananth); David Harrington; Wesley Eddy;
>> middisc@ietf.org
>> Subject: RE: [middisc] middisc specification update
>>
>> Thanks for posting the draft.
>>
>> The intention is to handle this as an AD-sponsored document,
>> not via an IETF working group.
>>
>> No presentation is needed.
>>
>> When all of the authors have agreed on it and consider it to
>
>From my point of view, I am done. Other stakeholders also have reviewed
>this document and they seem ok with it (as far as I can tell).  They can
>comment in any case.
>
>> be done, I will ask for a shepherd to do a writeup on it, and
>> I will do an AD review.  If it's acceptable, I'll send it
>> to IETF Last Call and through the rest of the IESG at that point.
>
>Great.
>
>>
>> At that point, I also think it will be good to notify TSVAREA
>> of it so that people have the opportunity to check it out during
>> the IETF LC.
>
>Sure, that makes sense.
>
>One process question though, what would be the "intended status" of this
>document?. If it was IETF WG doc, it would have been a standards
>track... since it is taking the AD sponsored route, I am assuming it
>needs to be informational.. not sure. Short question is : "is it ok to
>have a TCP option allocation request draft to be categorized as a
>non-standards track?"
>
>Thanks,
>-Anantha
>>
>> --
>> Wes Eddy
>> MTI Systems
>>
>>
>> >-----Original Message-----
>> >From: middisc-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:middisc-bounces@ietf.org] On
>> >Behalf Of Anantha Ramaiah (ananth)
>> >Sent: Friday, March 02, 2012 7:43 PM
>> >To: David Harrington; Wesley Eddy; middisc@ietf.org
>> >Subject: Re: [middisc] middisc specification update
>> >
>> >Hi Wes/David,
>> >
>> >I just posted a draft (draft-ananth-middisc-tcpopt-00.txt) which is a
>> >result of all the discussions we have had among the stakeholders.
>What
>> >are the next steps?  Is any presentation needed? I assume this is
>> >treated as an individual submission and not targeted to any WG and
>> >directly IESG would review it (Based on what you hinted last time,
>> Wes)
>> >
>> >Sorry it took time, but better late than never I guess. Thanks to all
>> >for their discussions, review and feedback.
>> >Thanks,
>> >Anantha
>> >
>> >> -----Original Message-----
>> >> From: middisc-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:middisc-bounces@ietf.org] On
>> >> Behalf Of Anantha Ramaiah (ananth)
>> >> Sent: Tuesday, January 17, 2012 1:30 PM
>> >> To: David Harrington; Wesley Eddy; middisc@ietf.org
>> >> Subject: Re: [middisc] middisc specification update
>> >>
>> >> I hope to get something out (based on the discussions so far)
>before
>> >> the
>> >> IETF deadlines. I'll start looking into this very soon.  I assume
>we
>> >> are
>> >> talking about the -00- cutoff deadline here and the IETF page says
>> it
>> >> is
>> >> March 5th.
>> >> -Anantha
>> >>
>> >> > -----Original Message-----
>> >> > From: middisc-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:middisc-bounces@ietf.org]
>> On
>> >> > Behalf Of David Harrington
>> >> > Sent: Tuesday, January 17, 2012 12:16 PM
>> >> > To: 'Wesley Eddy'; middisc@ietf.org
>> >> > Subject: Re: [middisc] middisc specification update
>> >> >
>> >> > three months later and a new deadline is approaching.
>> >> > Any chance of seeing progress on a draft?
>> >> >
>> >> > David Harrington
>> >> > Director, IETF Transport Area
>> >> > ietfdbh@comcast.net (preferred for ietf)
>> >> > dbharrington@huaweisymantec.com
>> >> > +1 603 828 1401 (cell)
>> >> >
>> >> > > -----Original Message-----
>> >> > > From: middisc-bounces@ietf.org
>> >> > > [mailto:middisc-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Wesley Eddy
>> >> > > Sent: Sunday, October 09, 2011 5:53 PM
>> >> > > To: middisc@ietf.org
>> >> > > Subject: [middisc] middisc specification update
>> >> > >
>> >> > > Hi folks, this is a reminder that there are cut-off dates
>> >> > approaching
>> >> > > for draft submission prior to the next IETF meeting.  If I
>> >> > understand
>> >> > > correctly, Andrew has the pen and should be working on either a
>> >new
>> >> > or
>> >> > > updated document based on prior discussions.  If it's at all
>> >> > possible
>> >> > > to get that in before the relevant cut-off date, that would be
>> >very
>> >> > > encouraging.
>> >> > >
>> >> > > --
>> >> > > Wes Eddy
>> >> > > MTI Systems
>> >> > > _______________________________________________
>> >> > > middisc mailing list
>> >> > > middisc@ietf.org
>> >> > > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/middisc
>> >> > >
>> >> >
>> >> > _______________________________________________
>> >> > middisc mailing list
>> >> > middisc@ietf.org
>> >> > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/middisc
>> >> _______________________________________________
>> >> middisc mailing list
>> >> middisc@ietf.org
>> >> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/middisc
>> >_______________________________________________
>> >middisc mailing list
>> >middisc@ietf.org
>> >https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/middisc