Re: [multipathtcp] potential MPTCP proxy charter item

<mohamed.boucadair@orange.com> Fri, 04 November 2016 10:32 UTC

Return-Path: <mohamed.boucadair@orange.com>
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 445C3129BF0 for <multipathtcp@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 4 Nov 2016 03:32:36 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -4.116
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.116 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3=-0.01, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=-0.01, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-1.497, SPF_PASS=-0.001, UNPARSEABLE_RELAY=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
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 cJSW7y1srf85 for <multipathtcp@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 4 Nov 2016 03:32:35 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from relais-inet.orange.com (relais-nor36.orange.com [80.12.70.36]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 054CF129BDE for <multipathtcp@ietf.org>; Fri, 4 Nov 2016 03:32:35 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from opfednr00.francetelecom.fr (unknown [xx.xx.xx.64]) by opfednr23.francetelecom.fr (ESMTP service) with ESMTP id B49A1C0238; Fri, 4 Nov 2016 11:32:33 +0100 (CET)
Received: from Exchangemail-eme2.itn.ftgroup (unknown [xx.xx.31.10]) by opfednr00.francetelecom.fr (ESMTP service) with ESMTP id 755F61A0064; Fri, 4 Nov 2016 11:32:33 +0100 (CET)
Received: from OPEXCLILMA3.corporate.adroot.infra.ftgroup ([fe80::60a9:abc3:86e6:2541]) by OPEXCLILM5C.corporate.adroot.infra.ftgroup ([fe80::4bd:9b2b:3651:6fba%19]) with mapi id 14.03.0319.002; Fri, 4 Nov 2016 11:32:33 +0100
From: <mohamed.boucadair@orange.com>
To: =?utf-8?B?TWlyamEgS8O8aGxld2luZA==?= <mirja.kuehlewind@tik.ee.ethz.ch>
Thread-Topic: [multipathtcp] potential MPTCP proxy charter item
Thread-Index: AQHSNn6XQgvumHnbm0arzSIWTM7lXaDInQiw
Date: Fri, 4 Nov 2016 10:32:32 +0000
Message-ID: <787AE7BB302AE849A7480A190F8B933009DAC60C@OPEXCLILMA3.corporate.adroot.infra.ftgroup>
References: <CCD1A987-0F3C-4775-8B0E-5232965E7E22@nokia.com> <787AE7BB302AE849A7480A190F8B933009D945B7@OPEXCLILMA3.corporate.adroot.infra.ftgroup> <428609FE-DE79-45CD-B668-EF95F409B593@tik.ee.ethz.ch> <8bed05c5-9f6f-04aa-8aa8-690aa3ce30f4@uclouvain.be> <CAO249ydpdtR53VBniDczSt4zj_kk32c2W_FoZKs2XED0Jzk7Jw@mail.gmail.com> <787AE7BB302AE849A7480A190F8B933009D9577B@OPEXCLILMA3.corporate.adroot.infra.ftgroup> <22907_1476946228_58086934_22907_5464_1_a7bca8d2-7656-4ff0-9f01-cf307f017148@OPEXCLILM42.corporate.adroot.infra.ftgroup> <57543A7A-1542-4C60-A5D3-E1658354BE5A@tik.ee.ethz.ch> <73a1c0dd64a843a5baa645d960c82886@rew09926dag03b.domain1.systemhost.net> <b8bfd5c6-21eb-4c4f-879a-851c3a71792a@OPEXCLILM31.corporate.adroot.infra.ftgroup> <56CE164A-9A62-4B57-9CFF-33DBD45BA8B2@gmail.com> <787AE7BB302AE849A7480A190F8B933009D9CA84@OPEXCLILMA3.corporate.adroot.infra.ftgroup> <85D52AE4-FE5F-4977-8927-6BDB72614D07@gmail.com> <787AE7BB302AE849A7480A190F8B933009DAAA88@OPEXCLILMA3.corporate.adroot.infra.ftgroup> <D2630820-7586-4361-A626-3278F22C319C@gmail.com> <B7D8197F-D833-41BB-A4A4-D6F31A3B8993@tik.ee.ethz.ch>
In-Reply-To: <B7D8197F-D833-41BB-A4A4-D6F31A3B8993@tik.ee.ethz.ch>
Accept-Language: fr-FR, en-US
Content-Language: fr-FR
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
x-originating-ip: [10.168.234.1]
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64
MIME-Version: 1.0
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/multipathtcp/d7J_HhEhAGp2tXR-jxUFdNbqV7c>
Cc: "multipathtcp@ietf.org" <multipathtcp@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [multipathtcp] potential MPTCP proxy charter item
X-BeenThere: multipathtcp@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17
Precedence: list
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: Fri, 04 Nov 2016 10:32:36 -0000

Mirja, 

I'm replying to this point separately because I do think it is an important discussion to have.

* I see "a big benefit" for some operators to offload the MTPCP proxies if the server is MPTCP-capable.

* I don’t see "a big benefit" for the client from a QoE perspective, because they already have the MPTCP experience with the network assistance (network aggregation, path resiliency).
* I don’t see "a big benefit" for the client if the MPTCP-capable server decides to use a given path to place data, while that path is subject to a data volume quota. This means that the client will be mono-path quickly if an MPTCP-capable server adopts some traffic distribution schemes.
 
Can you please elaborate on "a big benefit" you mentioned in your message? 

Thank you.

Cheers,
Med

> -----Message d'origine-----
> De : Mirja Kühlewind [mailto:mirja.kuehlewind@tik.ee.ethz.ch]
> Envoyé : vendredi 4 novembre 2016 10:34
> À : BOUCADAIR Mohamed IMT/OLN; Alan Ford
> Cc : multipathtcp@ietf.org
> Objet : Re: [multipathtcp] potential MPTCP proxy charter item
> 
[SNIP]

I guess a
> proxy should always first forward the MCTCP handshake and only if the
> reply does not support MPTCP, then termite the connection, reply the
> initiator accordingly and setup a new TCP to the destination. This might
> cause additional delay but it provides a big benefit if the destination is
> MPTCP-capable and supports native deployment.
> 
> Mirja
>