IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: Take multipath to a BoF

Carsten Bormann <cabo@tzi.org> Wed, 07 October 2020 14:35 UTC

Return-Path: <cabo@tzi.org>
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 5D00C3A0A39 for <quic@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 7 Oct 2020 07:35:33 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.897
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.897 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H4=0.001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, 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 KmXVA5VqWXLr for <quic@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 7 Oct 2020 07:35:32 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from gabriel-vm-2.zfn.uni-bremen.de (gabriel-vm-2.zfn.uni-bremen.de [134.102.50.17]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 14FDB3A09AC for <quic@ietf.org>; Wed, 7 Oct 2020 07:35:31 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [192.168.217.124] (p548dcc60.dip0.t-ipconnect.de [84.141.204.96]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by gabriel-vm-2.zfn.uni-bremen.de (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 4C5xhL4D2HzyRg; Wed, 7 Oct 2020 16:35:30 +0200 (CEST)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 13.4 \(3608.120.23.2.4\))
Subject: Re: Take multipath to a BoF
From: Carsten Bormann <cabo@tzi.org>
In-Reply-To: <E2C884AC-5FC8-46B9-B879-F5A0B6F53C14@ericsson.com>
Date: Wed, 07 Oct 2020 16:35:30 +0200
Cc: "quic@ietf.org" <quic@ietf.org>
X-Mao-Original-Outgoing-Id: 623774130.01232-058f76fed58262f02558e96056bd86b5
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-Id: <A6F2BF8C-E3CA-49C0-8F8F-2692324852DA@tzi.org>
References: <f7dcea59-985c-4e31-b743-36315f2cb7e3@www.fastmail.com> <E2C884AC-5FC8-46B9-B879-F5A0B6F53C14@ericsson.com>
To: Mirja Kuehlewind <mirja.kuehlewind=40ericsson.com@dmarc.ietf.org>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3608.120.23.2.4)
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/quic/K35wFhofCoX783Vrh4x2EDtn0y8>
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: Wed, 07 Oct 2020 14:35:33 -0000

On 2020-10-07, at 14:35, Mirja Kuehlewind <mirja.kuehlewind=40ericsson.com@dmarc.ietf.org> wrote:
> 
> what we have seen for the MPTCP wg is that we at the end had a split of people where some of the usual TCP expert would not participate in the MPTCP discussion anymore which I think was also not ideal.

How much of the current discussion is essentially about QUIC people covertly telling us they wouldn’t want to participate in the multipath-QUIC discussion any more?

Grüße, Carsten

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email