Re: [multipathtcp] potential new work item on MPTCP API

Olivier Bonaventure <Olivier.Bonaventure@uclouvain.be> Tue, 26 July 2016 10:43 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 D2EF312D1B9 for <multipathtcp@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 26 Jul 2016 03:43:43 -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 x8JQEOoDKI-E for <multipathtcp@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 26 Jul 2016 03:43:41 -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 766F912D180 for <multipathtcp@ietf.org>; Tue, 26 Jul 2016 03:43:41 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mbpobo.dhcp.info.ucl.ac.be (mbpobo.dhcp.info.ucl.ac.be [130.104.228.16]) (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 640B467E049; Tue, 26 Jul 2016 12:43:34 +0200 (CEST)
DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.9.2 smtp4.sgsi.ucl.ac.be 640B467E049
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple/simple; d=uclouvain.be; s=selucl; t=1469529814; bh=FmjHR6sewOOzSQUvma33i+7EvgEjW6d/685PG25kEPQ=; h=Reply-To:Subject:References:To:From:Date:In-Reply-To; b=H3+fBm3TTJAyWTJ+FnsLlUS3S5doDooLzpnBcTE3KZL7jzGs0J8Qb7OLcGZaj8JzF iPIhJmJtM410CqgySo/Teud3ANqEu1kuWNq3sDmABzOALbhzkWL3it9K89Vn8s+eRg 6wGU6T7gft6H9VreUwdhkSkO0pSc9Jf6VoiQ/tSA=
X-Virus-Status: Clean
X-Virus-Scanned: clamav-milter 0.99 at smtp-4
References: <3b62f69a53554789966e8a281a4000d7@rew09926dag03b.domain1.systemhost.net>
To: philip.eardley@bt.com, multipathtcp@ietf.org
From: Olivier Bonaventure <Olivier.Bonaventure@uclouvain.be>
Message-ID: <865c7622-213d-9847-c1df-1be5818fd9aa@uclouvain.be>
Date: Tue, 26 Jul 2016 12:43:52 +0200
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.11; rv:45.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/45.2.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <3b62f69a53554789966e8a281a4000d7@rew09926dag03b.domain1.systemhost.net>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-Sgsi-Spamcheck: SASL authenticated,
X-SGSI-Information:
X-SGSI-MailScanner-ID: 640B467E049.A22C3
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/uYaW6KMkWoneJOiaTTl_O8pmd98>
Subject: Re: [multipathtcp] potential new work item on MPTCP API
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: Tue, 26 Jul 2016 10:43:44 -0000

Phil,

> Yesterday Olivier presented about his & Benjamin’s recent work on MPTCP
> socket api. We didn’t have much discussion whether to add this to the
> charter. One comment was that any work should build on /reference RFC6897.
>
> https://www.ietf.org/proceedings/96/slides/slides-96-mptcp-4.pdf
>
> Please can you comment whether you see this as a useful work item, or
> you think it shouldn’t be worked on, or how it should be adapted to
> something you think the WG should work on.
>

Many MPTCP users have expressed their interest in this work and after 
the meeting, several MPTCP implementors sit together and proposed ideas 
on how to further improve the work. With several implementors involved, 
I think that we can get very good results

> To help prompt the discussion, here’s a very first version of some
> possible charter text
>
> RFC6897 defined an optional, basic application interface for MPTCP-aware
> applications, including a set of socket operations. Now there is more
> experience of how MPTCP is being used, the WG will re-visit this work,
> and consider adding more advanced socket operations.
>
>

Fine for me
>
> RFC6897 was Informational – would this new Milestone be Informational or
> Experimental?

We should go for Informational, like the socket API for SCTP
https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc6458


Olivier