Re: [nwcrg] TR: New Version Notification for draft-irtf-nwcrg-coding-and-congestion-01.txt

Michael Welzl <michawe@ifi.uio.no> Sat, 08 February 2020 13:53 UTC

Return-Path: <michawe@ifi.uio.no>
X-Original-To: nwcrg@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: nwcrg@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D358E120046 for <nwcrg@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sat, 8 Feb 2020 05:53:39 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.899
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.899 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=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 4kUglEedl9_g for <nwcrg@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sat, 8 Feb 2020 05:53:36 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail-out01.uio.no (mail-out01.uio.no [IPv6:2001:700:100:10::50]) (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 DB438120019 for <nwcrg@irtf.org>; Sat, 8 Feb 2020 05:53:35 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail-mx10.uio.no ([129.240.10.27]) by mail-out01.uio.no with esmtps (TLS1.2) tls TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (Exim 4.93.0.4) (envelope-from <michawe@ifi.uio.no>) id 1j0QY8-0002Fg-BO; Sat, 08 Feb 2020 14:53:32 +0100
Received: from ti0182q160-5358.bb.online.no ([84.202.71.46] helo=[10.0.0.5]) by mail-mx10.uio.no with esmtpsa (TLS1.2:ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384:256) user michawe (Exim 4.93.0.4) (envelope-from <michawe@ifi.uio.no>) id 1j0QY5-0007YP-UC; Sat, 08 Feb 2020 14:53:32 +0100
From: Michael Welzl <michawe@ifi.uio.no>
Message-Id: <24924DA3-6DDD-448E-96D1-09F1D7C3C570@ifi.uio.no>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="Apple-Mail=_C49416FD-F25F-4355-9B07-128CD3FAB225"
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 12.4 \(3445.104.11\))
Date: Sat, 8 Feb 2020 14:53:26 +0100
In-Reply-To: <1170541236.13290.1581121465312@mail.yahoo.com>
Cc: Kuhn Nicolas <Nicolas.Kuhn@cnes.fr>, Nwcrg <nwcrg@irtf.org>
To: lloyd.wood=40yahoo.co.uk@dmarc.ietf.org
References: <158105949299.16113.616856321541547326.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> <F3B0A07CFD358240926B78A680E166FF1ED5B8C9@TW-MBX-P03.cnesnet.ad.cnes.fr> <1170541236.13290.1581121465312@mail.yahoo.com>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3445.104.11)
X-UiO-SPF-Received: Received-SPF: neutral (mail-mx10.uio.no: 84.202.71.46 is neither permitted nor denied by domain of ifi.uio.no) client-ip=84.202.71.46; envelope-from=michawe@ifi.uio.no; helo=[10.0.0.5];
X-UiO-Spam-info: not spam, SpamAssassin (score=-5.0, required=5.0, autolearn=disabled, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, UIO_MAIL_IS_INTERNAL=-5, uiobl=NO, uiouri=NO)
X-UiO-Scanned: FF6C6C21515424DCE27BD17AEE1793D74A004727
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/nwcrg/JmWeL03kCOe98LV1N07OVC4qfFU>
Subject: Re: [nwcrg] TR: New Version Notification for draft-irtf-nwcrg-coding-and-congestion-01.txt
X-BeenThere: nwcrg@irtf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: IRTF Network Coding Research Group discussion list <nwcrg.irtf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.irtf.org/mailman/options/nwcrg>, <mailto:nwcrg-request@irtf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/nwcrg/>
List-Post: <mailto:nwcrg@irtf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:nwcrg-request@irtf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.irtf.org/mailman/listinfo/nwcrg>, <mailto:nwcrg-request@irtf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 08 Feb 2020 13:53:40 -0000

Thanks!  We’ll explain in the next version.
“Tail loss” has become a common term in transport - because it’s a common problem: e.g. web transfers are usually short, and it’s not uncommon to lose just the last few packets of them (hence “tail”) - but then, for these packets, the sender never gets a DupACK, and all that helps is a timeout, creating significant delay.

Cheers,
Michael


> On Feb 8, 2020, at 1:24 AM, lloyd.wood=40yahoo.co.uk@dmarc.ietf.org wrote:
> 
> What is a "tail loss"? The trem is used repeatedly...
> 
> thanks
> 
> 
> Lloyd Wood
> lloyd.wood@yahoo.co.uk
> 
> On Friday, February 7, 2020, 6:52 pm, Kuhn Nicolas <Nicolas.Kuhn@cnes.fr> wrote:
> 
> Hello everyone, 
> 
> Following the fruitfull discussions we had at last IETF, we have been working on an updated version of the document. 
> We have clarified the interactions between the transport congestion control and the FEC mechanism and clarified the scope of the document. 
> 
> We expect to further work on the document before the cut-off (and at least include a discussion on the receiver). 
> In the meantime, please let us know if you have any views on this document.
> 
> Thanks, 
> 
> Nico
> 
> -----Message d'origine-----
> De : internet-drafts@ietf.org <mailto:internet-drafts@ietf.org> <internet-drafts@ietf.org <mailto:internet-drafts@ietf.org>> 
> Envoyé : vendredi 7 février 2020 08:12
> À : Michael Welzl <michawe@ifi.uio.no <mailto:michawe@ifi.uio.no>>; Francois Michel <francois.michel@uclouvain.be <mailto:francois.michel@uclouvain.be>>; Kuhn Nicolas <Nicolas.Kuhn@cnes.fr <mailto:Nicolas.Kuhn@cnes.fr>>; Emmanuel Lochin <emmanuel.lochin@isae-supaero.fr <mailto:emmanuel.lochin@isae-supaero.fr>>
> Objet : New Version Notification for draft-irtf-nwcrg-coding-and-congestion-01.txt
> 
> 
> A new version of I-D, draft-irtf-nwcrg-coding-and-congestion-01.txt
> has been successfully submitted by Nicolas Kuhn and posted to the IETF repository.
> 
> Name:        draft-irtf-nwcrg-coding-and-congestion
> Revision:    01
> Title:        Coding and congestion control in transport
> Document date:    2020-02-06
> Group:        nwcrg
> Pages:        9
> URL:            https://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-irtf-nwcrg-coding-and-congestion-01.txt <https://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-irtf-nwcrg-coding-and-congestion-01.txt>
> Status:        https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-irtf-nwcrg-coding-and-congestion/ <https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-irtf-nwcrg-coding-and-congestion/>
> Htmlized:      https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-irtf-nwcrg-coding-and-congestion-01 <https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-irtf-nwcrg-coding-and-congestion-01>
> Htmlized:      https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-irtf-nwcrg-coding-and-congestion <https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-irtf-nwcrg-coding-and-congestion>
> Diff:          https://www.ietf.org/rfcdiff?url2=draft-irtf-nwcrg-coding-and-congestion-01 <https://www.ietf.org/rfcdiff?url2=draft-irtf-nwcrg-coding-and-congestion-01>
> 
> Abstract:
>   Coding is a reliability mechanism that is distinct and separated from
>   the loss detection of congestion controls.  Using coding can be a
>   useful way to better deal with tail losses or with networks with non-
>   congestion losses.  However, coding mechanisms should not hide
>   congestion signals.  This memo offers a discussion of how coding and
>   congestion control can coexist.  This document can help the
>   comparison of FEC schemes by identifying at which level they are
>   operating with respect to the transport congestion control.
> 
>   This document is the product of the Coding for Efficient Network
>   Communications Research Group (NWCRG).  The scope of the document is
>   end-to-end communications: coding for tunnels is out-of-the scope of
>   the document.
> 
>                                                                                   
> 
> 
> Please note that it may take a couple of minutes from the time of submission until the htmlized version and diff are available at tools.ietf.org.
> 
> The IETF Secretariat
> 
> _______________________________________________
> nwcrg mailing list
> nwcrg@irtf.org <mailto:nwcrg@irtf.org>
> https://www.irtf.org/mailman/listinfo/nwcrg <https://www.irtf.org/mailman/listinfo/nwcrg>
> _______________________________________________
> nwcrg mailing list
> nwcrg@irtf.org
> https://www.irtf.org/mailman/listinfo/nwcrg