Re: [multipathtcp] Preparing for Prague meeting - things to delete or add to MPTCP protocol bis

While implementing MPTCP for Solaris I struggled with how the keys and 
tokens were created and used. It is not clear what needs to be in 
network byte order. I got interoperability with Linux by simply trying 
the combinations. It might be good to add some specifics unless the 
community feels that it is just my lack of understanding of cryptography.

Regards,

Shoaib

On 07/06/2015 11:01 AM, philip.eardley@bt.com wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> In the Prague meeting, we aim to move forward the protocol bis doc (to 
> meeting our Cahrter objetive for a standards track version of RFC6824)
>
> One topic we'd like to discuss is if there's anything that should be 
> deleted from or added to the current draft, 
> https://tools.ietf.org/wg/mptcp/draft-ietf-mptcp-rfc6824bis/ - based 
> on operational and implementation experience.
>
> Any proposals?
>
> Looking at the (expired) draft summarising the various implementations,
>
> https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-eardley-mptcp-implementations-survey-02
>
> one thing that may be worth discussing is whether we need both 4 & 8 
> byte Data ack & DSS
>
> <<   All implementations support 4 bytes "Data ACK" and "Data sequence
>    number" fields, and will interoperate with an implementation sending
>    8 bytes.  Implementation 1 uses only 4 bytes fields; if an
>    implementation sends an 8 byte data sequence number it replies with a
>    4 byte data ack.
>
> >>
>
> I don't think the implementation survey suggests that there's anything 
> else worth considering deleting - are there any other proposals?
>
> As to things to add, there are a few proposals for some (minor?) 
> additions in the recent set of drafts from Olivier Bonaventure and team.
>
> Since we have a lot more requests for presentation time than it's 
> possible to squeeze into the meeting, it would be excellent to have 
> discussion on the list before the meeting, about anything that should 
> be added to, or deleted from, the current rfc6824bis, before we 
> progress it to WG last call.
>
> thanks!
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> multipathtcp mailing list
> multipathtcp@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/multipathtcp