Re: Spin bit as a negotiated option
<alexandre.ferrieux@orange.com> Sun, 14 October 2018 17:05 UTC
Return-Path: <alexandre.ferrieux@orange.com>
X-Original-To: quic@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: quic@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2D14B127B92 for <quic@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sun, 14 Oct 2018 10:05:18 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: 1.109
X-Spam-Level: *
X-Spam-Status: No, score=1.109 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_05=-0.5, FORGED_MUA_MOZILLA=2.309, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, SPF_PASS=-0.001, UNPARSEABLE_RELAY=0.001] autolearn=no 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 5k5_TXf8HIOA for <quic@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sun, 14 Oct 2018 10:05:17 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from orange.com (mta239.mail.business.static.orange.com [80.12.66.39]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 6344E130DCA for <quic@ietf.org>; Sun, 14 Oct 2018 10:05:15 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from opfedar02.francetelecom.fr (unknown [xx.xx.xx.4]) by opfedar25.francetelecom.fr (ESMTP service) with ESMTP id 42Y7HF4bbTz8tBY; Sun, 14 Oct 2018 19:05:13 +0200 (CEST)
Received: from Exchangemail-eme2.itn.ftgroup (unknown [xx.xx.31.3]) by opfedar02.francetelecom.fr (ESMTP service) with ESMTP id 42Y7HF3sh1zCqkM; Sun, 14 Oct 2018 19:05:13 +0200 (CEST)
Received: from [10.193.4.89] (10.168.234.4) by OPEXCLILM5D.corporate.adroot.infra.ftgroup (10.114.31.3) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 14.3.408.0; Sun, 14 Oct 2018 19:05:13 +0200
Subject: Re: Spin bit as a negotiated option
To: IETF QUIC WG <quic@ietf.org>
CC: Kazuho Oku <kazuhooku@gmail.com>
References: <14531_1538460420_5BB30B04_14531_237_4_c0f3a391-9897-80b0-575b-aa73edad0d52@orange.com> <45751C2A-9F6C-4447-8D70-11ABE8C07F8D@trammell.ch> <CANatvzzCvmbu=bN1C-UCzNaT6EUPVCMPwY53wyFNkKa4HQT00g@mail.gmail.com> <E32A1E8D-0FD7-47F3-B026-10D46E201D54@trammell.ch> <21082_1538561186_5BB494A2_21082_335_1_26ed0978-a314-37d1-3c97-5924d62ef539@orange.com> <CANatvzy87Lc-kyzQUcZZS7unvaBQF+DUoEHsd1G0UoPncr4AEQ@mail.gmail.com> <4582_1538649993_5BB5EF89_4582_187_1_98109893-8492-6a58-0534-3fc4eaa09dd9@orange.com> <CY4PR22MB0983849F01312CBE18A4F69CDAEA0@CY4PR22MB0983.namprd22.prod.outlook.com> <HE1PR0701MB2393C0B9756449E5CC060723E2EB0@HE1PR0701MB2393.eurprd07.prod.outlook.com> <EEF07499-6E93-46E5-A50A-D2690D670D3C@trammell.ch> <15185_1538742735_5BB759CF_15185_399_1_d9cdb295-d68e-ee43-938e-e3a79003d731@orange.com> <CANatvzztOx72qACw9VWFW1S89Kgn6a+bMTH+qERd57aPXfbaLQ@mail.gmail.com> <AF2ED1E9-B72C-4526-ADC7-77BD4C12D300@trammell.ch>
From: alexandre.ferrieux@orange.com
Message-ID: <2158_1539536713_5BC37749_2158_236_1_8bd88e52-0816-279f-d5fb-314be3d16f47@orange.com>
Date: Sun, 14 Oct 2018 19:05:13 +0200
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux i686; rv:52.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/52.8.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <AF2ED1E9-B72C-4526-ADC7-77BD4C12D300@trammell.ch>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"; format="flowed"
Content-Language: en-US
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Originating-IP: [10.168.234.4]
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/quic/8AH4-107pGyF1GYncmz3ZGiccn0>
X-BeenThere: quic@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: Main mailing list of the IETF QUIC working group <quic.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/quic>, <mailto:quic-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/quic/>
List-Post: <mailto:quic@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:quic-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/quic>, <mailto:quic-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 14 Oct 2018 17:05:18 -0000
Hello, FWIW, PicoQuic now implements several "spin bit" variants, to be selected by version number as discussed here. Endpoints can thus decide to allow for on-path RTT measurement, loss location, both, or none. _________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ Ce message et ses pieces jointes peuvent contenir des informations confidentielles ou privilegiees et ne doivent donc pas etre diffuses, exploites ou copies sans autorisation. Si vous avez recu ce message par erreur, veuillez le signaler a l'expediteur et le detruire ainsi que les pieces jointes. Les messages electroniques etant susceptibles d'alteration, Orange decline toute responsabilite si ce message a ete altere, deforme ou falsifie. Merci. This message and its attachments may contain confidential or privileged information that may be protected by law; they should not be distributed, used or copied without authorisation. If you have received this email in error, please notify the sender and delete this message and its attachments. As emails may be altered, Orange is not liable for messages that have been modified, changed or falsified. Thank you.
- Spin bit decision alexandre.ferrieux
- Re: Spin bit decision Lars Eggert
- Re: Spin bit decision alexandre.ferrieux
- Re: Spin bit decision Lars Eggert
- RE: Spin bit decision Marcus Ihlar
- Re: Spin bit decision Lars Eggert
- Re: Spin bit decision alexandre.ferrieux
- Re: Spin bit decision Lars Eggert
- Re: Spin bit decision Mikkel Fahnøe Jørgensen
- Re: Spin bit decision Brian Trammell (IETF)
- Re: Spin bit decision alexandre.ferrieux
- Re: Spin bit decision Lars Eggert
- RE: Spin bit decision Nick Banks
- Re: Spin bit decision alexandre.ferrieux
- Re: Spin bit decision Brian Trammell (IETF)
- RE: Spin bit decision Lucas Pardue
- Re: Spin bit decision alexandre.ferrieux
- RE: Spin bit decision Lucas Pardue
- Re: Spin bit decision Benjamin Kaduk
- Re: Spin bit decision Lars Eggert
- RE: Spin bit decision Mike Bishop
- Re: Spin bit decision Ted Hardie
- Re: Spin bit decision Ian Swett
- RE: Spin bit decision Mike Bishop
- Re: Spin bit decision Marten Seemann
- signaling that QUIC is QUIC was Re: Spin bit deci… Brian Trammell (IETF)
- a proposed way forward was Re: Spin bit decision Brian Trammell (IETF)
- Re: a proposed way forward was Re: Spin bit decis… Marten Seemann
- Re: Spin bit decision alexandre.ferrieux
- Re: a proposed way forward was Re: Spin bit decis… Kazuho Oku
- Re: Spin bit decision Kazuho Oku
- Re: a proposed way forward was Re: Spin bit decis… alexandre.ferrieux
- Re: a proposed way forward was Re: Spin bit decis… Mikkel Fahnøe Jørgensen
- Re: a proposed way forward was Re: Spin bit decis… Brian Trammell (IETF)
- Re: a proposed way forward was Re: Spin bit decis… Brian Trammell (IETF)
- Re: a proposed way forward was Re: Spin bit decis… Mikkel Fahnøe Jørgensen
- RE: a proposed way forward was Re: Spin bit decis… Lucas Pardue
- Spin bit as a negotiated option alexandre.ferrieux
- Re: a proposed way forward was Re: Spin bit decis… Kazuho Oku
- Re: a proposed way forward was Re: Spin bit decis… Kazuho Oku
- RE: Spin bit decision Mike Bishop
- Re: Spin bit as a negotiated option Kazuho Oku
- Re: Spin bit as a negotiated option alexandre.ferrieux
- Re: Spin bit as a negotiated option Kazuho Oku
- RE: Spin bit decision Gabriel Montenegro
- Re: Spin bit as a negotiated option alexandre.ferrieux
- Re: Spin bit as a negotiated option Kazuho Oku
- RE: Spin bit as a negotiated option Mike Bishop
- RE: Spin bit as a negotiated option Marcus Ihlar
- Re: Spin bit as a negotiated option Marten Seemann
- Re: Spin bit as a negotiated option alexandre.ferrieux
- RE: Spin bit as a negotiated option Marcus Ihlar
- Re: Spin bit as a negotiated option Brian Trammell (IETF)
- Re: Spin bit as a negotiated option Brian Trammell (IETF)
- Re: Spin bit as a negotiated option alexandre.ferrieux
- Re: Spin bit as a negotiated option Kazuho Oku
- Re: Spin bit as a negotiated option Kazuho Oku
- Re: Spin bit as a negotiated option Brian Trammell (IETF)
- SV: Spin bit as a negotiated option Marcus Ihlar
- Re: Spin bit as a negotiated option alexandre.ferrieux
- Re: Spin bit as a negotiated option Kazuho Oku