Re: [multipathtcp] Adding a new work item on MPTCP API

Mirja Kühlewind <mirja.kuehlewind@tik.ee.ethz.ch> Wed, 09 November 2016 10:52 UTC

Return-Path: <mirja.kuehlewind@tik.ee.ethz.ch>
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 2276B12945F for <multipathtcp@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 9 Nov 2016 02:52:54 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -5.697
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-5.697 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-1.497] 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 gZiyUJ30LmOr for <multipathtcp@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 9 Nov 2016 02:52:51 -0800 (PST)
Received: from smtp.ee.ethz.ch (smtp.ee.ethz.ch [129.132.2.219]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id C7AF712950B for <multipathtcp@ietf.org>; Wed, 9 Nov 2016 02:52:51 -0800 (PST)
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by smtp.ee.ethz.ch (Postfix) with ESMTP id A06F3D930C; Wed, 9 Nov 2016 11:52:49 +0100 (MET)
X-Virus-Scanned: by amavisd-new on smtp.ee.ethz.ch
Received: from smtp.ee.ethz.ch ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (.ee.ethz.ch [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with LMTP id DJRZVK7iIJlu; Wed, 9 Nov 2016 11:52:49 +0100 (MET)
Received: from [82.130.103.143] (nb-10510.ethz.ch [82.130.103.143]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) (Authenticated sender: mirjak) by smtp.ee.ethz.ch (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 4C02ED930B; Wed, 9 Nov 2016 11:52:49 +0100 (MET)
To: philip.eardley@bt.com, multipathtcp@ietf.org
References: <0a0d2a248fac4616ac795c579d996be8@rew09926dag03b.domain1.systemhost.net>
From: =?UTF-8?Q?Mirja_K=c3=bchlewind?= <mirja.kuehlewind@tik.ee.ethz.ch>
Message-ID: <876384b7-f65c-743a-9a0a-7b8f1c8c71ce@tik.ee.ethz.ch>
Date: Wed, 9 Nov 2016 11:52:48 +0100
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:45.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/45.4.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <0a0d2a248fac4616ac795c579d996be8@rew09926dag03b.domain1.systemhost.net>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/multipathtcp/wGw06XZl344aIWz9P9XznlcLXv8>
Subject: Re: [multipathtcp] Adding a new work item on MPTCP API
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: Wed, 09 Nov 2016 10:52:54 -0000

What do you mean by "including a set of socket operations"? I'm not sure if 
RFC6897 define any operations. I'm actually not sure what socket operations 
are...

Mirja


On 09.11.2016 11:21, philip.eardley@bt.com wrote:
> Following the earlier discussion, there is support to add a charter item as
> follows:
>
> <<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. The document will be
> Informational.>>
>
> If you disagree with this being added, or suggest some mod to this item,
> please say.
>
> Thanks
>
> Phil & Yoshi
>
>
>
> *From:*cpaasch@apple.com [mailto:cpaasch@apple.com]
> *Sent:* 31 July 2016 20:37
> *To:* Eardley,PL,Philip,TUB8 R <philip.eardley@bt.com>
> *Cc:* MultiPath TCP - IETF WG <multipathtcp@ietf.org>
> *Subject:* Re: [multipathtcp] potential new work item on MPTCP API
>
>
>
>
>
>     On Jul 26, 2016, at 7:35 AM, philip.eardley@bt.com
>     <mailto:philip.eardley@bt.com> wrote:
>
>
>
>     Christoph,
>
>     https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc6897#section-5.3 is “Sockets Interface
>     Extensions by the Basic MPTCP API”
>
>     (also https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc6897#appendix-A “Appendix A.
>     Requirements on a Future Advanced MPTCP API”)
>
>
>
> Ok, I see. Fair enough. Extension to RFC6897 seems fine to me then.
>
>
>
>
>
> Cheers,
>
> Christoph
>
>
>
>     phil
>
>
>
>     *From:* cpaasch@apple.com <mailto:cpaasch@apple.com>
>     [mailto:cpaasch@apple.com]
>     *Sent:* 22 July 2016 09:48
>     *To:* Eardley,PL,Philip,TUB8 R <philip.eardley@bt.com
>     <mailto:philip.eardley@bt.com>>
>     *Cc:* MultiPath TCP - IETF WG <multipathtcp@ietf.org
>     <mailto:multipathtcp@ietf.org>>
>     *Subject:* Re: [multipathtcp] potential new work item on MPTCP API
>
>
>
>     Hello,
>
>
>
>         On Jul 21, 2016, at 5:43 PM, philip.eardley@bt.com
>         <mailto:philip.eardley@bt.com> wrote:
>
>         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.
>
>
>
>     yes, I think it is a very useful work item and am willing to contribute
>     to this work.
>
>
>
>     I'm not sure whether this can be seen as an update to 6897. I'm under the
>     impression that 6897 takes a different approach, giving users a
>     high-level overview of how using MPTCP might look like to an application
>     that is talking to a TCP-socket (which happens to end up using MPTCP).
>
>
>
>     Olivier's work seems to rather make MPTCP entirely explicit to the
>     application. So, I think both works take a different approach.
>
>
>
>
>         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.
>
>
>
>         RFC6897 was Informational – would this new Milestone be Informational
>         or Experimental?
>
>
>
>     I think it should be Informational.
>
>
>
>
>
>     Christoph
>
>
>
>
>
>
>         Thanks
>
>         phil
>
>
>
>         Philip Eardley
>
>         Research and Innovation
>
>         This email contains BT information, which may be privileged or
>         confidential. It's meant only for the individual(s) or entity named
>         above. If you're not the intended recipient, note that disclosing,
>         copying, distributing or using this information is prohibited. If
>         you've received this email in error, please let me know immediately
>         on the email address above. Thank you.
>         We monitor our email system, and may record your emails.
>
>         British Telecommunications plc
>         Registered office: 81 Newgate Street London EC1A 7AJ
>         Registered in England no: 1800000
>
>
>
>         _______________________________________________
>         multipathtcp mailing list
>         multipathtcp@ietf.org <mailto:multipathtcp@ietf.org>
>         https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/multipathtcp
>
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> multipathtcp mailing list
> multipathtcp@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/multipathtcp
>