Re: [multipathtcp] Possible future items for mptcp WG

[Xavier de Foy <[e-mail]>]

Hi Yoshi, thanks for the explanation, it makes sense to me. We will update
the 5G considerations draft shortly, hopefully it will help defining a more
concrete proposal.
Best Regards,
Xavier.


On Wed, Jun 20, 2018 at 2:54 AM, Yoshifumi Nishida <[e-mail]>
wrote:

> Hi Xavier,
>
> Thanks. I think the timing you mentioned won't be a critical issue by
> itself.
> However, one question is how soon we can have concrete proposals to MPTCP
> for 5G networks.
> If there are already some solid features in 5G and we have explicit ideas
> to update or extend MPTCP for them, I think there will be possibilities.
> --
> Yoshi
>
>
> On Tue, Jun 19, 2018 at 12:45 PM, Xavier de Foy <[e-mail]>
> wrote:
>
>> Hi Yoshi,
>>
>>   Thanks for the answer. In term of timing: 5G global deployment should
>> occur in 2020 (with smaller/test deployments before this), so work related
>> to 5G adaptation may be best completed within 12 to 18 months (just my
>> understanding, maybe others on the list can share their views on the best
>> timing for this type of work). Do you think it is too far ahead, or would
>> it make sense to include 5G related investigations in the list?
>>
>>   Best Regards,
>>
>> Xavier
>>
>> On Fri, Jun 15, 2018 at 4:04 AM, Yoshifumi Nishida <
>> [e-mail]> wrote:
>>
>>> Hi Xavier,
>>>
>>> Thank you so much!
>>> Yes, we have thought about 5G stuff as well.
>>> The reason why we haven't included in the list below was it might not be
>>> a short term topic while it can be important for mptcp in future.
>>> New suggestions to mptcp with regard to this topic will always be very
>>> welcome.
>>> --
>>> Yoshi
>>>
>>>
>>> On Thu, Jun 14, 2018 at 2:01 PM, Xavier de Foy <[e-mail]>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Yoshifumi & Phil,
>>>>
>>>>   Another potential item under "Feature Extensions" could be dedicated
>>>> to interoperability with 5G. We are preparing an update to the "5G
>>>> considerations" draft presented in the last session, which can be used as
>>>> input for the group to decide if it should be on this list.
>>>>
>>>>   Best Regards,
>>>> Xavier
>>>>
>>>> On Thu, Jun 14, 2018 at 3:16 AM, Yoshifumi Nishida <
>>>> [e-mail]> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Hello everyone,
>>>>>
>>>>> Phil and I have been discussing the next step for the WG.
>>>>> After we finish 6824bis, we ｗon't have active WG items as the proxy work
>>>>> will be discussed at tcpm WG.
>>>>> One suggestion might be to close the WG or to put it in dormant state,
>>>>> however, we are thinking there still might be some more working items
>>>>> as we've seen interesting presentations for new ideas, experiment
>>>>> results and so on at the meetings and on the ML.
>>>>>
>>>>> Below is the list of potential working items from the chairs' point of
>>>>> view.
>>>>> Please let us know if you think some of them are important items for the
>>>>> WG (and your willingness to contribute if possible) or there are some
>>>>> more items, or this is not something we should work on, etc.
>>>>>
>>>>> Also, if you have some opinions on the status of the WG or suggestions to
>>>>> the chairs, please let us hear!
>>>>>
>>>>> We appreciate your feedback
>>>>>
>>>>> Thanks,
>>>>> --
>>>>> Yoshi & Phil
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> 1: API extensions (This is already in our charter)
>>>>>     draft-hesmans-mptcp-socket
>>>>>     draft-samar-mptcp-socketapi
>>>>>
>>>>> 2: Feature extensions
>>>>>     a) robust initial setup
>>>>>         proposed by Markus, also Kien presented a similar idea
>>>>>
>>>>>     b) fast subflow setup
>>>>>         proposed by Quentin
>>>>>
>>>>>     c) security enhancement
>>>>>         1) TLS
>>>>>             draft-bonaventure-mptcp-tls-00
>>>>>             draft-paasch-mptcp-tls-authentication-00
>>>>>
>>>>>         2) Utilize proposals from tcpinc?
>>>>>
>>>>>         3) Elliptic Curve Cryptography
>>>>>             draft-kim-mptcp-semptcp-00
>>>>>
>>>>>     d) Solutions for operational issues
>>>>>          1) how to handle nat64 issue proposed by Quentin
>>>>>          2) how to handle load balancer proposed by Fabien, Christoph,
>>>>> Costin
>>>>>
>>>>> 3: Congestion Control (This topic itself should probably be discussed
>>>>> at ICCRG. But, it may trigger some updates of the protocol or APIs later)
>>>>>      a) OLIA
>>>>>           draft-khalili-mptcp-congestion-control-05
>>>>>
>>>>>      b) mptcp + BBR?
>>>>>           presented by Jing
>>>>>
>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>> multipathtcp mailing list
>>>>> [e-mail]
>>>>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/multipathtcp
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>
>