Re: [multipathtcp] Regarding rate control at a subflow level

[<[e-mail]>]

Christoph, 
Coming back to your comment:

<<
another use-case for rate-control I see is when a client wants to tell a sender to gracefully close a subflow.

- Sending a TCP-RST results in packet-loss of the in-flight data.
- Reducing the window is going to stall the whole connection because the window is shared.
- Setting MP_PRIO also won't work because none might want to drain a secondary
  subflow even if the "primary" subflow is having severe packet-loss.

Thus, a "maximum-rate" option on a per-subflow level would allow to send the rate to 0, which would drain the subflow.
>>

Christoph,

Can you explain the 3rd bullet please? I think "none" must be a typo (I assume for 'one' / you)
Not sure I get why the approach in the bis document doesn’t work? Surely if I set the B flag on a subflow then traffic is no longer sent on it, even if the other subflow is dropping a lot of packets? (but presumably this case would mean that the packet rate dropped a lot). 

<<
Another use of the MP_PRIO option is to set the 'B' flag on a subflow
   to cleanly retire its use before closing it and removing it with
   REMOVE_ADDR Section 3.4.2, for example to support make-before-break
   session continuity, where new subflows are added before the
   previously used ones are closed.
>>

Thanks
phil