Re: [multipathtcp] potential MPTCP proxy charter item

Olivier Bonaventure <> Wed, 19 October 2016 19:51 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id 071541294C9 for <>; Wed, 19 Oct 2016 12:51:39 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -4.301
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: (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key)
Received: from ([]) by localhost ( []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id f7q5qM8jQnHN for <>; Wed, 19 Oct 2016 12:51:37 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ( []) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 38E4912941E for <>; Wed, 19 Oct 2016 12:51:37 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [] ( []) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) (Authenticated sender: by (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 7881E67DB26; Wed, 19 Oct 2016 21:51:18 +0200 (CEST)
DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.9.2 7881E67DB26
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple/simple;; s=selucl; t=1476906678; bh=B51YSerB1ZReGamdlEkGlT6BS5PIB++54msDGuMkQ5Y=; h=Reply-To:Subject:References:To:Cc:From:Date:In-Reply-To; b=OATeYP8O8CsL3YXYh3T92P5+QFO9Wz2OfJ9EsBPImskkNEfqjmVHHYsvX4/Sc8/13 s2pFyufoA6OGwzSo0fuF2AalwbxrbR+w5SzQy7BgVEw4UUOUI+lB8PfRgzoLoooSyu 5BFLBjIpkOLq8qI3k44hzqu1ksEMe9yscdMl1iko=
X-Virus-Status: Clean
X-Virus-Scanned: clamav-milter 0.99 at smtp-1
References: <> <787AE7BB302AE849A7480A190F8B933009D945B7@OPEXCLILMA3.corporate.adroot.infra.ftgroup> <>
To: Mirja Kühlewind <>,
From: Olivier Bonaventure <>
Message-ID: <>
Date: Wed, 19 Oct 2016 21:42:18 +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: <>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"; format="flowed"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Sgsi-Spamcheck: SASL authenticated,
X-SGSI-MailScanner-ID: 7881E67DB26.A5299
X-SGSI-MailScanner: Found to be clean
X-SGSI-Spam-Status: No
Archived-At: <>
Cc: "" <>
Subject: Re: [multipathtcp] potential MPTCP proxy charter item
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17
Precedence: list
List-Id: Multi-path extensions for TCP <>
List-Unsubscribe: <>, <>
List-Archive: <>
List-Post: <>
List-Help: <>
List-Subscribe: <>, <>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 19 Oct 2016 19:51:39 -0000

> there are two cases to distinguish here:
> 1) you have one or two MPTCP proxies that terminate the TCP connection and open a new MPTCP connection

There is a very clear demand for this type of solution and there are 
various implementations that are available or are being developped. 
Several deployments exist and there is a large demand for this type of 
services. It would be silly for the IETF to ignore this use case after 
having spent years to specify the Multipath TCP protocol.