Re: [multipathtcp] Finishing RFC6824bis
Christoph Paasch <cpaasch@apple.com> Sun, 18 February 2018 22:07 UTC
Return-Path: <cpaasch@apple.com>
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 3ABAD126C83 for <multipathtcp@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sun, 18 Feb 2018 14:07:38 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -4.309
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.309 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.01, WEIRD_PORT=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=apple.com
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 sRFKsOfUW7_Y for <multipathtcp@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sun, 18 Feb 2018 14:07:36 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail-in4.apple.com (mail-out4.apple.com [17.151.62.26]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 37792120227 for <multipathtcp@ietf.org>; Sun, 18 Feb 2018 14:07:36 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=apple.com; s=mailout2048s; c=relaxed/simple; q=dns/txt; i=@apple.com; t=1518991656; x=2382905256; h=From:Sender:Reply-To:Subject:Date:Message-id:To:Cc:MIME-version:Content-type: Content-Transfer-Encoding:Content-ID:Content-Description:Resent-Date:Resent-From: Resent-Sender:Resent-To:Resent-Cc:Resent-Message-ID:In-reply-to:References:List-Id: List-Help:List-Unsubscribe:List-Subscribe:List-Post:List-Owner:List-Archive; bh=nQcxAeRPqBkgEnxGc4wG9MsRkud0odAe08nrXrv73eI=; b=0J6JEXXNUGivZPHJFVi3FD/GOmULvxbWQXqg5/43+KFS5KQoG3yLN5obVSxpwDnz UQu2FlAvWfd5vAfOkoQ0KNatyPb2T8c52flmTejMs4YUggdphVq8BS2KDwQ2mZbD 5zUPrbzAt+VrnBI260osam/6tHG7ZfnVTqOU4ophhDvGstLUvlDHuw+7dlhXh8OS xnS5smuyu43GU3j/I5N5Q8jx6IOJ32jqidGokS0/F67pIClCG9RyfmvCB1ZMJxl9 xfBp9u/LNQKIqFztgaxgrySzYZjezdo14zyVGHEPz2LrPXEQpKlzBqcMR7IVh7Zx x40d4EOg+GUwORzUoLobfw==;
Received: from relay2.apple.com (relay2.apple.com [17.128.113.67]) (using TLS with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (Client did not present a certificate) by mail-in4.apple.com (Apple Secure Mail Relay) with SMTP id 90.A9.07147.829F98A5; Sun, 18 Feb 2018 14:07:36 -0800 (PST)
X-AuditID: 11973e12-d46b29e000001beb-10-5a89f928c0e8
Received: from nwk-mmpp-sz09.apple.com (nwk-mmpp-sz09.apple.com [17.128.115.80]) by relay2.apple.com (Apple SCV relay) with SMTP id 1C.FE.26650.729F98A5; Sun, 18 Feb 2018 14:07:36 -0800 (PST)
MIME-version: 1.0
Content-type: multipart/alternative; boundary="Boundary_(ID_fcvWmxj+EO507MJVnCwwYw)"
Received: from [17.149.208.112] by nwk-mmpp-sz09.apple.com (Oracle Communications Messaging Server 8.0.2.2.20180130 64bit (built Jan 30 2018)) with ESMTPSA id <0P4D006UI9GNMH00@nwk-mmpp-sz09.apple.com>; Sun, 18 Feb 2018 14:07:35 -0800 (PST)
Sender: cpaasch@apple.com
From: Christoph Paasch <cpaasch@apple.com>
Message-id: <B76389E8-1288-4B8D-88AA-53BB86E7270F@apple.com>
Date: Sun, 18 Feb 2018 14:07:34 -0800
In-reply-to: <cbe5b5b0e8564e4fb1bb82f67f2c0e71@rew09926dag03b.domain1.systemhost.net>
Cc: MultiPath TCP - IETF WG <multipathtcp@ietf.org>
To: Philip Eardley <philip.eardley@bt.com>
References: <8efe9632021940bbac21fc1d12fa4539@rew09926dag03b.domain1.systemhost.net> <162e9b4c97b44700affb0b1096cdea7e@rew09926dag03b.domain1.systemhost.net> <fd278cd1838543b69858e50d781ea8bd@rew09926dag03b.domain1.systemhost.net> <20180130064527.GC689@MacBook-Pro.local> <cbe5b5b0e8564e4fb1bb82f67f2c0e71@rew09926dag03b.domain1.systemhost.net>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3445.6.9)
X-Brightmail-Tracker: H4sIAAAAAAAAA+NgFrrELMWRmVeSWpSXmKPExsUi2FDorKvxszPKYF8Pm8Xn1dfZLJatXcHo wOTR9mUyk8eSJT+ZApiiuGxSUnMyy1KL9O0SuDLOdPQxF+zOqZjVI9/AODmmi5GTQ0LARGLn lNfMILaQwGomiccf9GDic5ddZeli5AKKH2SUOH/kPxNIgldAUOLH5HssIDazQJjEpkPPmSCK vjFKvJh2iRUkISwgKdF95w7YVDYBLYm3t9tZIZptJNZsv8sIUWMg0dbaCTaURUBV4vvLDrAa ToFwibY3rUC9HEALjCWmzDQCCYsAjelZchFq1yMmiTsnN7BAXKoocXbpRHaQhITAHDaJOTvW Mk1gFJqF5NhZSI6FsLUkvj9qBYqD7JCXOHheFiKsKfHs3id2CFtb4sm7C6wLGNlWMQrlJmbm 6GbmmeglFhTkpOol5+duYgRFwnQ7oR2Mp1ZZHWIU4GBU4uEV2NgZJcSaWFZcmXuIUZqDRUmc d/1HoJBAemJJanZqakFqUXxRaU5q8SFGJg5OqQZGDplpV2ve3pFVvr34Raq5RaOF7KHA36bm Zx8Yfjx29YWF0s7thoKz9TKeLw6U4Gedx+P8W5zrx/ojpjMec6RPOxbaail8iUvrQ5uvfVTI HOecWf3tXU3KbBmrNZ48bq323XQt+NR+H8tinkal0xnGH+a8je8SeBP0zqi7fM0U8+9Kda81 OPmUWIozEg21mIuKEwEj+Kp5ZQIAAA==
X-Brightmail-Tracker: H4sIAAAAAAAAA+NgFjrGLMWRmVeSWpSXmKPExsUi2FAcoKvxszPKYOkXJovPq6+zWSxbu4LR gcmj7ctkJo8lS34yBTBFcdmkpOZklqUW6dslcGWc6ehjLtidUzGrR76BcXJMFyMnh4SAicTc ZVdZuhi5OIQEDjJKnD/ynwkkwSsgKPFj8j0WEJtZIExi06HnTBBF3xglXky7xAqSEBaQlOi+ c4cZxGYT0JJ4e7udFaLZRmLN9ruMEDUGEm2tnWBDWQRUJb6/7ACr4RQIl2h70wrUywG0wFhi ykwjkLAI0JieJRehdj1ikrhzcgMLxKWKEmeXTmSfwMg/C8l9s5DcB2FrSXx/1AoUBxkrL3Hw vCxEWFPi2b1P7BC2tsSTdxdYFzCyrWIUKErNSaw00kssKMhJ1UvOz93ECA7dQucdjMeWWR1i FOBgVOLhFdjYGSXEmlhWXJl7iFGCg1lJhPe+O1CINyWxsiq1KD++qDQntfgQozQHi5I475Pg lighgfTEktTs1NSC1CKYLBMHp1QDo5U6U8Rpt28dSWd2p5j+Ni75vt/N/eW6rQrHqlp2XxSb mFbhsIdr/efJVw+kZ3h9vXBswjaR1XfXK/iuso+yv5B+IVN5/pZE+1fO35mXWdf2ex9eWZ+d HyK3rsiDvWu/zcptv9/1PdlT5vrZSzLpSEJTy8sPf3z+/1eo3Tr/Ts9ST/34jUee3FViKc5I NNRiLipOBAD6uu3WWQIAAA==
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/multipathtcp/ym4KojtXmCcPO4WMoF3VVPGrDQE>
Subject: Re: [multipathtcp] Finishing RFC6824bis
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: Sun, 18 Feb 2018 22:07:38 -0000
Hello Phil & all, to simplify collaboration, we are now hosting the draft on github at https://github.com/multipath-tcp/draft-ietf-mptcp-rfc6824bis <https://github.com/multipath-tcp/draft-ietf-mptcp-rfc6824bis>. People can submit pull-requests and issue-reports there. We added the text for TFO and Olivier's MP_FASTCLOSE proposal, and will release a new version of the draft soon, before the deadline for IETF 101. Cheers, Christoph > On Jan 30, 2018, at 12:54 AM, philip.eardley@bt.com wrote: > > Yes, please can you provide text as soon as possible. It was agreed to add text back in July..... > > -----Original Message----- > From: cpaasch@apple.com [mailto:cpaasch@apple.com] > Sent: 30 January 2018 06:45 > To: Eardley,PL,Philip,TUD1 R <philip.eardley@bt.com> > Cc: multipathtcp@ietf.org > Subject: Re: [multipathtcp] Finishing RFC6824bis > > On 29/01/18 - 13:42:48, philip.eardley@bt.com wrote: >> Hi, >> Is there any news or plans about the list of items to finalise the bis? > > Currently, there isn't yet an implementation of SHA-256. I will see what I can do (if someone wants to give it a shot, that would be great! Code is at https://multipath-tcp.org :-)). > >> Also, the bis needs re-activating, as the draft is about to expire > > We posted an update of draft-barre-mptcp-tfo-02 a few months back. Could we integrate this in the bis before we finalize it? I can provide the text for it. > > > Christoph > >> >> Thanks >> phil >> >> >> From: multipathtcp [mailto:multipathtcp-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of >> philip.eardley@bt.com >> Sent: 23 October 2017 09:52 >> To: multipathtcp@ietf.org >> Subject: Re: [multipathtcp] Finishing RFC6824bis >> >> Hi, >> << Implementers - implement SHA-256. As I understand it, this is the >> only part of the bis for which we don't have at least one implementation. Is there any timescale for implementing this?>> I was wondering if there was an update or plans about this. Alternatively, we may decide it's ok to go ahead with last call without an implementation for this aspect. >> Thanks >> phil >> From: Eardley,PL,Philip,TUD1 R >> Sent: 26 July 2017 15:46 >> To: Eardley,PL,Philip,TUD1 R >> <philip.eardley@bt.com<mailto:philip.eardley@bt.com>> >> Subject: Finishing RFC6824bis >> >> We are close to finalising the bis and being able to WG Last call and send it to the IESG. Here's a list of actions. If we've forgotten anything, or anyone has another mod /addition to the bis, please say. >> >> 1. Make the changes agreed - see email below. >> >> 2. Implementers - implement SHA-256. As I understand it, this is the only part of the bis for which we don't have at least one implementation. Is there any timescale for implementing this? >> >> 3. Chairs /all - list of changes between RFC & bis, along with a short justification >> >> 4. Chairs /all - a short justification for obsoleting RFC6824 >> >> 5. Chairs /all - List of implementations of the protocol & bis (ie a check of which parts are implemented once or also in iOS) >> Our proposed plan is that once the various parts of #1 are done, we'll do a WGLC. Items 3, 4 & 5 are things that will be useful to the IESG. Item 2 is certainly something that would be nice to have - if there'll be a significant delay implementing it, then we should discuss whether to wait, or whether it's acceptable to progress without an implementation of this part. >> Finally a reminder that the plan is that RFC6824bis advances on the >> Standards track >> >> >> From: Eardley,PL,Philip,TUD1 R >> Sent: 26 July 2017 08:51 >> To: multipathtcp <multipathtcp@ietf.org<mailto:multipathtcp@ietf.org>> >> Subject: Changes to RFC6824bis >> >> Hi, >> During the discussions in Prague, we had good agreement about the >> following change to the bis. This is a change to the wire protocol. >> Please say as soon as possible if you disagree with this change, >> otherwise we'll go ahead and make this change:- >> >> Remove address identifier from MP-PRIO, as it can be used as an attack. >> >> Explanation at >> https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/multipathtcp/WWWaQ3AKWEMgsBSPKc_ >> R9Ct_YoI and follow up emails. The issue was briefly summarised during >> the Friday meeting in Prague - eg see the etherpad for a summary >> http://etherpad.tools.ietf.org:9000/p/notes-ietf-99-mptcp?useMonospace >> Font=true >> >> Alan - are you ok to make this change please? >> >> -- >> >> In addition, we agreed in principle to the following (informational) changes to the bis - exact text to be proposed. >> >> 2. Guidance about MPTCP & TFP interactions, based on https://www.ietf.org/proceedings/99/slides/slides-99-mptcp-sessb-mptcp-tfo-00.pdf - Christoph & Olivier, please propose text. >> >> 3. There was a suggestion, arising from the hackathon, to discuss on the list whether clarifications or extra 'reason codes' would be useful in the context of reset option. Quentin (& others), please make a proposal. >> Best wishes, >> Phil & Yoshi >> > >> _______________________________________________ >> multipathtcp mailing list >> multipathtcp@ietf.org >> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/multipathtcp >
- Re: [multipathtcp] Finishing RFC6824bis philip.eardley
- Re: [multipathtcp] Finishing RFC6824bis philip.eardley
- Re: [multipathtcp] Finishing RFC6824bis Christoph Paasch
- Re: [multipathtcp] Finishing RFC6824bis philip.eardley
- Re: [multipathtcp] Finishing RFC6824bis Christoph Paasch
- Re: [multipathtcp] Finishing RFC6824bis philip.eardley
- Re: [multipathtcp] Finishing RFC6824bis Christoph Paasch