Re: [multipathtcp] Ben Campbell's No Objection on draft-ietf-mptcp-experience-06: (with COMMENT)

Olivier Bonaventure <Olivier.Bonaventure@uclouvain.be> Thu, 27 October 2016 19:59 UTC

Return-Path: <olivier.bonaventure@uclouvain.be>
X-Original-To: multipathtcp@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: multipathtcp@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 33ADE1298AB; Thu, 27 Oct 2016 12:59:17 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -4.301
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.301 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_MED=-2.3, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=uclouvain.be
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 9Ic-5xxAXYtv; Thu, 27 Oct 2016 12:59:16 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from smtp4.sgsi.ucl.ac.be (smtp.sgsi.ucl.ac.be [130.104.5.67]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 40C2812986F; Thu, 27 Oct 2016 12:59:14 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mbpobo.local (host-78-129-6-94.dynamic.voo.be [78.129.6.94]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) (Authenticated sender: obonaventure@smtp4.sgsi.ucl.ac.be) by smtp4.sgsi.ucl.ac.be (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 7431867DF56; Thu, 27 Oct 2016 21:59:07 +0200 (CEST)
DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.9.2 smtp4.sgsi.ucl.ac.be 7431867DF56
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple/simple; d=uclouvain.be; s=selucl; t=1477598347; bh=LV+NI36g8QbKyUxsFVfCdF60WqLbepWAIDdPsWvG4/4=; h=Reply-To:Subject:References:To:Cc:From:Date:In-Reply-To; b=WgtOrUajsAPijbv5BjJbGEZOFxi/e4LCriM7u9dwk0RubSRQoQe8u5JZw/TRMNelp rb2TI9qU3xVPYYolXR/n0bAMKY2cvc4k9R9DAzQSMF+52nu7AICFIvUQWTk9YsO9Md jarW+PWeHjwYqPdIYbm65mWOsOn2w+mK9rlZPp+M=
X-Virus-Status: Clean
X-Virus-Scanned: clamav-milter 0.99 at smtp-4
References: <147390072338.29788.17044849429232369661.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com>
To: Ben Campbell <ben@nostrum.com>, The IESG <iesg@ietf.org>
From: Olivier Bonaventure <Olivier.Bonaventure@uclouvain.be>
Message-ID: <d6832f9e-45ef-95f8-9fc1-72e2833af317@uclouvain.be>
Date: Thu, 27 Oct 2016 21:58:58 +0200
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.11; rv:45.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/45.4.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <147390072338.29788.17044849429232369661.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Sgsi-Spamcheck: SASL authenticated,
X-SGSI-Information:
X-SGSI-MailScanner-ID: 7431867DF56.A59DA
X-SGSI-MailScanner: Found to be clean
X-SGSI-From: olivier.bonaventure@uclouvain.be
X-SGSI-Spam-Status: No
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/multipathtcp/BmE6SxVKMWH_ke3_Xq2tS3AXzGE>
Cc: multipathtcp@ietf.org, draft-ietf-mptcp-experience@ietf.org, mptcp-chairs@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [multipathtcp] Ben Campbell's No Objection on draft-ietf-mptcp-experience-06: (with COMMENT)
X-BeenThere: multipathtcp@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17
Precedence: list
Reply-To: Olivier.Bonaventure@uclouvain.be
List-Id: Multi-path extensions for TCP <multipathtcp.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/multipathtcp>, <mailto:multipathtcp-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/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, 27 Oct 2016 19:59:17 -0000

Ben,

Thanks for your comments. We are now able to address all of them.
A revised version will be uploaded soon on the IETF servers.
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> COMMENT:
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> I support Stephen's comment, and have a few minor comments of my own
> (none of which are showstoppers):
>
> -1, first paragraph: I'm not sure we should describe an experimental RFC
> as "standardized".
>

Fixed.

> -1, mention of iOS7: Is this really limited to iOS7 and not future
> versions? Would it make since to say that "Since September 2013...is also
> supported ... iOS"? (i.e. without the version?)   (Noting that iOS10
> released this week...)

iOS has been using MPTCP since iOS7, the next issue of the IETF Journal 
will contain additional information about this large MPTCP deployment. 
We've added a reference to this forthcoming article in the draft.

> - 2.2, paragraph 9: Figure 1 just shows a generic 2 path connection. It
> doesn't seem to "summarize" the described scenario.

The figure might be removed. Difficult to write a clearer figure in ASCII.
>
> -2.2, 2nd paragraph after figure 1: I'm pretty sure there are in fact
> real applications that transfer bulk data. Do you mean to say that "Some
> [or even many or most] real applications do not..."
>

I have updated the text.

Thanks for your comments


Olivier