Re: [multipathtcp] q about off-path proxy (explicit mode)

[Yoshifumi Nishida <[e-mail]>]

Hi Med,

On Tue, Mar 28, 2017 at 5:20 AM, <[e-mail]> wrote:

> Hi Yoshi,
>
>
>
> Please see inline.
>
>
>
> Cheers,
>
> Med
>
>
>
> *De :* Yoshifumi Nishida [mailto:[e-mail]]
> *Envoyé :* lundi 27 mars 2017 16:18
> *À :* BOUCADAIR Mohamed IMT/OLN
> *Cc :* Yoshifumi Nishida; multipathtcp
> *Objet :* Re: [multipathtcp] q about off-path proxy (explicit mode)
>
>
>
> Hi Med,
>
>
>
> On Mon, Mar 27, 2017 at 12:32 PM, <[e-mail]> wrote:
>
> Re-,
>
>
>
> Please see inline.
>
>
>
> Cheers,
>
> Med
>
>
>
> *De :* Yoshifumi Nishida [mailto:[e-mail]]
> *Envoyé :* lundi 27 mars 2017 13:21
> *À :* BOUCADAIR Mohamed IMT/OLN
> *Cc :* Yoshifumi Nishida; multipathtcp
> *Objet :* Re: [multipathtcp] q about off-path proxy (explicit mode)
>
>
>
> Hi Olivier, Med,
>
>
>
> Thanks for the response. I have been thinking that it would be better if
> we can classify our use cases so that we can have clear vision for what to
> solve. Things I may want to classify is:
>
>    a) solutions requires changes in only MPTCP or in TCP general
>
>    b) solutions requires proxies to be on-path or solutions that work with
> off-path proxy.
>
>
>
> We can think about the solutions for a) if we think it's necessary, but I
> am thinking that the proper venue for the discussion might not be this WG.
>
>
>
> I think the approach Med mentioned requires the proxy to be on-path, so I
> would like to classify it as an on-path solution.
>
> [Med] I’m not sure to follow you here. What I described is aligned with
> the target dual proxy case (https://tools.ietf.org/html/
> draft-nam-mptcp-deployment-considerations-01#section-4.2): the first
> proxy is embedded on a CPE. There is no technical problem there to
> intercept the traffic to be proxyied given that the CPE sees all the
> traffic.
>
>
>
> Well, this classification might be a bit different from the way described
> in the draft.
>
> What I meant for off-path (explicit) case is the cases where the proxy is
> not on the path between client and server. No more and no less.
>
> [Med] I see. As you can read in the plain mode draft, implicit/explicit
> thing is drawn from the perspective of the MCP located at the network
> provider side.
>

I think I understand the perspective.
I am thinking that if we don't combine explicit mode and off-path, it will
be less confusing (at least to me)
In my understanding, explicit mode can be used for off-path (probably for
single proxy case) and on-path (probably for 2 proxy case)
Implicit mode probably will be used for on-path case only.

--
Yoshi