Re: [multipathtcp] Consensus call on potential MPTCP proxy work

Joe Touch <touch@isi.edu> Fri, 21 April 2017 16:06 UTC

Return-Path: <touch@isi.edu>
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 3A03E128B8F for <multipathtcp@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 21 Apr 2017 09:06:12 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -6.901
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.901 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-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 s2opnzn7aByN for <multipathtcp@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 21 Apr 2017 09:06:11 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from vapor.isi.edu (vapor.isi.edu [128.9.64.64]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 413FD126E3A for <multipathtcp@ietf.org>; Fri, 21 Apr 2017 09:06:11 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [128.9.184.96] ([128.9.184.96]) (authenticated bits=0) by vapor.isi.edu (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id v3LG60x2016405 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=NOT); Fri, 21 Apr 2017 09:06:01 -0700 (PDT)
To: Yoshifumi Nishida <nishida@sfc.wide.ad.jp>
Cc: multipathtcp <multipathtcp@ietf.org>
References: <8c5ffa879686472594bfd3db2fa06076@rew09926dag03b.domain1.systemhost.net> <99affa00-5118-1a0f-227a-b3f4b751ffd4@isi.edu> <CAO249ye4Yz2Fgf5=XG5F3JkODym1AXrZV3pXyVLgG-h2iVhLVw@mail.gmail.com> <8cd97018-1104-c647-45fc-9135097e7420@isi.edu> <CAO249ycQqVweB5TaQNa2s8uFvQhSQrESrNmF1+8a8_ZO+Yqkyg@mail.gmail.com> <8bef96b7-1b7d-94eb-2e59-7323c2a9b866@isi.edu> <CAO249yfrdywsJt5VNnCFLG2hPfvyeDEYVWex4h=tUVgTZfuh7w@mail.gmail.com>
From: Joe Touch <touch@isi.edu>
Message-ID: <a07b3ee8-f925-699a-69b8-b8c67a2d14b7@isi.edu>
Date: Fri, 21 Apr 2017 09:05:58 -0700
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; WOW64; rv:52.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/52.0.1
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <CAO249yfrdywsJt5VNnCFLG2hPfvyeDEYVWex4h=tUVgTZfuh7w@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Language: en-US
X-ISI-4-43-8-MailScanner: Found to be clean
X-MailScanner-From: touch@isi.edu
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/multipathtcp/w7OXagDgqUcGhlMFsUdj6bg42MQ>
Subject: Re: [multipathtcp] Consensus call on potential MPTCP proxy work
X-BeenThere: multipathtcp@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22
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, 21 Apr 2017 16:06:12 -0000


On 4/21/2017 2:00 AM, Yoshifumi Nishida wrote:
> In my view, TFO relies on the info from past connections and we
> somehow believe it's valid and not staled. But, it's still external
> info because it is from the outside of the current connection.
> This case relies on other type of external info and when we believe
> the info, we will send data in SYN. I personally don't see big
> differences.

Again, TFO semantics were vetted by TCPM over a fairly long set of
discussions.

If you want TFO behavior, use TFO.

If you want to argue that this is a different way to achieve the same
results, that's a very long road of discussions to begin.

That discussion is IMO outside the scope of MPTCP (there's no zero-delay
open in its charter).

Joe