IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [mif] clarification on HE-MIF algorithm

Dave Thaler <dthaler@microsoft.com> Mon, 23 November 2015 16:44 UTC

Return-Path: <dthaler@microsoft.com>
X-Original-To: mif@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: mif@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id BFBF61A8F40 for <mif@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 23 Nov 2015 08:44:10 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -102.002
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-102.002 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] autolearn=ham
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 1YCAJxpuYVoR for <mif@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 23 Nov 2015 08:44:06 -0800 (PST)
Received: from na01-bl2-obe.outbound.protection.outlook.com (mail-bl2on0114.outbound.protection.outlook.com [65.55.169.114]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4D7D31A8A7E for <mif@ietf.org>; Mon, 23 Nov 2015 08:44:06 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=microsoft.com; s=selector1; h=From:To:Date:Subject:Message-ID:Content-Type:MIME-Version; bh=qM1w7nFwOIlw+l7+Mq9TdaXjF94Iuyiyp+TQ6iV4ZzE=; b=TsDdHzIkVveB8OVkbSolYCJeSK0WiWlduikCKdJmzxxE51d4kYKekOH7F8//s5CAKXtRdu/DC8rYHbevo9zai7HNE2DZyV0CqQLiFwtw4QoJmX9gsIgYkd0j+TXkmj7bjvRpfJ59CvDt/P1yA4JA2NFwwc3cYU8r28WJ6k7HMgA=
Received: from BY2PR03MB412.namprd03.prod.outlook.com (10.141.141.25) by BY2PR03MB409.namprd03.prod.outlook.com (10.141.141.11) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.1.331.20; Mon, 23 Nov 2015 16:44:03 +0000
Received: from BY2PR03MB412.namprd03.prod.outlook.com ([10.141.141.25]) by BY2PR03MB412.namprd03.prod.outlook.com ([10.141.141.25]) with mapi id 15.01.0325.019; Mon, 23 Nov 2015 16:44:03 +0000
From: Dave Thaler <dthaler@microsoft.com>
To: GangChen <phdgang@gmail.com>, "mif@ietf.org" <mif@ietf.org>
Thread-Topic: [mif] clarification on HE-MIF algorithm
Thread-Index: AQHRJc/3XfJH8uZmyESgDQqIBlC0AJ6p0EVQ
Date: Mon, 23 Nov 2015 16:44:03 +0000
Message-ID: <BY2PR03MB412D257127022C820331E0BA3070@BY2PR03MB412.namprd03.prod.outlook.com>
References: <CAM+vMETqmJSEdPzBUqacH8a1fMwvxeMwew1vJG5g7sxMHRfDwA@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CAM+vMETqmJSEdPzBUqacH8a1fMwvxeMwew1vJG5g7sxMHRfDwA@mail.gmail.com>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
authentication-results: spf=none (sender IP is ) smtp.mailfrom=dthaler@microsoft.com;
x-originating-ip: [67.182.144.235]
x-microsoft-exchange-diagnostics: 1; BY2PR03MB409; 5:v0VZUprMoTaWDokN2sRIIfWuOnNrTyGrLzwmc09U5BVPfXz7KnLd7B7Cnwmd6STDJdgYDJ0SXAdo1AGVHD8uNoD4ewUvP3rVRLlZ9Z5nw/sfoCGFrJZ8ZSDSm2E31rddCs/fM6svzEqqR2e4jn/o1A==; 24:tYrAMOIVo06GDRF7GjixQw77EfXtXKWr5jdhldz/468CL7LCZYcQXiy07TPVuM6B3dQB1TqoUmsoI/8/aShbQqCbyvoZj355Qr2bIvyk5I0=
x-microsoft-antispam: UriScan:;BCL:0;PCL:0;RULEID:;SRVR:BY2PR03MB409;
x-microsoft-antispam-prvs: <BY2PR03MB40959391074796F5028AF3DA3070@BY2PR03MB409.namprd03.prod.outlook.com>
x-exchange-antispam-report-test: UriScan:(194151415913766)(189930954265078)(108003899814671);
x-exchange-antispam-report-cfa-test: BCL:0; PCL:0; RULEID:(61425024)(601004)(2401047)(5005006)(520078)(8121501046)(3002001)(10201501046)(61426024)(61427024); SRVR:BY2PR03MB409; BCL:0; PCL:0; RULEID:; SRVR:BY2PR03MB409;
x-forefront-prvs: 07697999E6
x-forefront-antispam-report: SFV:NSPM; SFS:(10019020)(6009001)(199003)(377454003)(13464003)(377424004)(52044002)(189002)(53754006)(2950100001)(189998001)(586003)(2900100001)(5001960100002)(86362001)(86612001)(101416001)(87936001)(77096005)(19580405001)(19580395003)(122556002)(66066001)(2501003)(5002640100001)(15975445007)(40100003)(5003600100002)(76576001)(5008740100001)(11100500001)(92566002)(54356999)(74316001)(10090500001)(50986999)(5005710100001)(8990500004)(76176999)(10400500002)(10290500002)(5004730100002)(5001920100001)(106356001)(106116001)(33656002)(97736004)(5001770100001)(105586002)(99286002)(81156007)(102836003)(5007970100001)(6116002)(4001150100001)(3846002); DIR:OUT; SFP:1102; SCL:1; SRVR:BY2PR03MB409; H:BY2PR03MB412.namprd03.prod.outlook.com; FPR:; SPF:None; PTR:InfoNoRecords; A:1; MX:1; LANG:en;
received-spf: None (protection.outlook.com: microsoft.com does not designate permitted sender hosts)
spamdiagnosticoutput: 1:23
spamdiagnosticmetadata: NSPM
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-OriginatorOrg: microsoft.com
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-originalarrivaltime: 23 Nov 2015 16:44:03.2118 (UTC)
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-fromentityheader: Hosted
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-id: 72f988bf-86f1-41af-91ab-2d7cd011db47
X-MS-Exchange-Transport-CrossTenantHeadersStamped: BY2PR03MB409
Archived-At: <http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/mif/6heOQ5hgkPW-fJjqTjwjGW5antM>
Cc: Hui Deng <denghui02@hotmail.com>, Margaret Cullen <mrcullen42@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [mif] clarification on HE-MIF algorithm
X-BeenThere: mif@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
List-Id: Multiple Interface Discussion List <mif.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/mif>, <mailto:mif-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/mif/>
List-Post: <mailto:mif@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:mif-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mif>, <mailto:mif-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 23 Nov 2015 16:44:10 -0000

The grammar in the minutes looks bad.  What I said was:

"RFC 6555 does not specify a mandatory algorithm, only requirements for algorithms,
and an example algorithm.  Does this draft try to make a particular algorithm mandatory?"

-----Original Message-----
From: GangChen [mailto:phdgang@gmail.com] 
Sent: Monday, November 23, 2015 1:19 AM
To: mif@ietf.org; Dave Thaler <dthaler@microsoft.com>
Cc: Margaret Cullen <mrcullen42@gmail.com>; Hui Deng <denghui02@hotmail.com>
Subject: [mif] clarification on HE-MIF algorithm

wg,

I would like to follow the meeting minutes to clarify a question from the discussion.

"
  DT - Clarifying question - base happy happy eyeballs spec has two
  algos, none of them mandatory no mandatory algorithm Does this
  specify a mandatory algo?
"

The HE-MIF doesn't specify mandatory algorithm.
Basically, HE-MIF is doing a similar way with RFC6555.
The draft describes step-wise requirements for any candidate algorithm.

BRs

Gang

2015-11-22 8:40 GMT+08:00, Hui Deng <denghui02@hotmail.com>:
> Hello all
>
> Appreciate Ian Farrer and Ted Lemon kindly help for minutes Also 
> Mikael Abrahamsson for Jabber
>
> https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3a%2f%2fwww.i
> etf.org%2fproceedings%2f94%2fminutes%2fminutes-94-mif&data=01%7c01%7cd
> thaler%40microsoft.com%7c6bd2810ca4334051554508d2f3e718cb%7c72f988bf86
> f141af91ab2d7cd011db47%7c1&sdata=%2bRV%2fK%2fz8QpfT2hibsHwfmnZe%2fItdr
> sF6vlPXxJs3oso%3d
>
> Please feel free to let chairs know whether you have some revision
>
> thanks a lot
>
> DENG Hui
>

v2.27.8 | Report a Bug | By Email | System Status