IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [multipathtcp] Time for Long Options?

Joe Touch <touch@isi.edu> Thu, 05 August 2010 14:57 UTC

Return-Path: <touch@isi.edu>
X-Original-To: multipathtcp@core3.amsl.com
Delivered-To: multipathtcp@core3.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D85AB3A67B1 for <multipathtcp@core3.amsl.com>; Thu, 5 Aug 2010 07:57:48 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -102.227
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-102.227 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.372, BAYES_00=-2.599, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id kdzIeZUA250x for <multipathtcp@core3.amsl.com>; Thu, 5 Aug 2010 07:57:48 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from vapor.isi.edu (vapor.isi.edu [128.9.64.64]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1BF403A63D3 for <multipathtcp@ietf.org>; Thu, 5 Aug 2010 07:57:48 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [128.9.160.252] (pen.isi.edu [128.9.160.252]) (authenticated bits=0) by vapor.isi.edu (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id o75EuIqb013084 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NOT); Thu, 5 Aug 2010 07:56:20 -0700 (PDT)
Message-ID: <4C5AD112.202@isi.edu>
Date: Thu, 05 Aug 2010 07:56:18 -0700
From: Joe Touch <touch@isi.edu>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 6.1; en-US; rv:1.9.1.11) Gecko/20100711 Thunderbird/3.0.6
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: L.Wood@surrey.ac.uk
References: <282447E9-0047-4F6C-8B6E-09301F72A930@nets.rwth-aachen.de> <1D99C255-6838-4017-B196-F3F558EE634D@muada.com> <8A2949EF-2F11-4D93-9C80-F9BA38AFBC0B@nets.rwth-aachen.de> <2B69FDEC-F19D-46F8-9D45-49B496FCD640@muada.com> <A8D9408E-CD02-4C90-B243-798AFA869B94@nets.rwth-aachen.de> <9DCAE0A3-6D76-4C4E-862B-3BDE879798B5@cs.ucl.ac.uk> <1E558979-D936-4BBC-ADE4-DD74C85474DA@nets.rwth-aachen.de> <5FDC413D5FA246468C200652D63E627A09B84785@LDCMVEXC1-PRD.hq.netapp.com> <1E3555D6-38D4-451D-A5A4-BBFBB9F3A46A@nets.rwth-aachen.de> <alpine.DEB.2.00.1007301007040.10894@melkinpaasi.cs.helsinki.fi> <87F55601-6C66-4BB5-8332-51F1A3989711@nets.rwth-aachen.de> <4C5282A6.2030101@isi.edu> <2D2FFE4726FAF74285C45D69FDC30E790220DB@PALLENE.office.hd> <4C5326FB.2080609@isi.edu> <2D2FFE4726FAF74285C45D69FDC30E79027EC7@PALLENE.office.hd>, <4C57D70B.3010306@isi.edu> <FD7B10366AE3794AB1EC5DE97A93A3730C2BF32002@EXMB01CMS.surrey.ac.uk> <4C59BFF4.80102@isi.edu> <B90125B6-4DEA-460D-B3EF-1EAC55058CD4@surrey.! ac.uk>
In-Reply-To: <B90125B6-4DEA-460D-B3EF-1EAC55058CD4@surrey.ac.uk>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1"; format="flowed"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-ISI-4-43-8-MailScanner: Found to be clean
X-MailScanner-From: touch@isi.edu
Cc: multipathtcp@ietf.org, Andreas.Ripke@neclab.eu
Subject: Re: [multipathtcp] Time for Long Options?
X-BeenThere: multipathtcp@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
List-Id: Multi-path extensions for TCP <multipathtcp.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/multipathtcp>, <mailto:multipathtcp-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/multipathtcp>
List-Post: <mailto:multipathtcp@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:multipathtcp-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/multipathtcp>, <mailto:multipathtcp-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 05 Aug 2010 14:57:48 -0000

On 8/5/2010 12:13 AM, L.Wood@surrey.ac.uk wrote:
>
> On 4 Aug 2010, at 20:31, Joe Touch wrote:
> On 8/3/2010 2:50 AM, L.Wood@surrey.ac.uk wrote:
>>> Joe,
>>>
>>>> As I noted, this problem was explored in numerous contexts in TCPM, and
>>>> the conclusion was that it was not feasible to extend options in the
>>>> SYN. That being the critical case, we didn't explore extending options
>>>> in just the payloads after the connection was established.
>>>
>>> didn't
>>> http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-eddy-tcp-loo
>>> do just that?
>>
>> Sec 3 did
>
> right.
>
> And doesn't TCP-CT contains a similar mechanism? That is on its way through
> the RFC-Editor...
> http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-simpson-tcpct-03

As an individual submission; the authors chose not to bring their work 
to the IETF. It has numerous problems.

Joe

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email