Re: QUIC - Our schedule and scope
Simon Pietro Romano <spromano@unina.it> Sun, 29 October 2017 10:26 UTC
Return-Path: <spromano@unina.it>
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 8FA8013FE2A for <quic@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sun, 29 Oct 2017 03:26:45 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.9
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.9 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-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 etYw2dekBeXk for <quic@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sun, 29 Oct 2017 03:26:43 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from unina.it (fmvip.unina.it [IPv6:2001:760:3403:ffff::7]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 6C26213AB34 for <quic@ietf.org>; Sun, 29 Oct 2017 03:26:43 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from smtp1.unina.it (smtp1.unina.it [192.132.34.61]) by leas1.unina.it with ESMTP id v9TAQcSk002961-v9TAQcSm002961 (version=TLSv1.0 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO); Sun, 29 Oct 2017 11:26:38 +0100
Received: from [192.168.1.65] (93-44-59-94.ip95.fastwebnet.it [93.44.59.94]) (authenticated bits=0) by smtp1.unina.it (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id v9TAQb2E021785 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO); Sun, 29 Oct 2017 11:26:37 +0100
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="Apple-Mail=_6E86E5CF-2EE7-4A0C-8A56-CED9CAC9370C"
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 9.3 \(3124\))
Subject: Re: QUIC - Our schedule and scope
From: Simon Pietro Romano <spromano@unina.it>
In-Reply-To: <FFBE48EA-FD6F-42C6-B1A4-80C4CD8D9864@netapp.com>
Date: Sun, 29 Oct 2017 11:26:32 +0100
Cc: Mark Nottingham <mnot@mnot.net>, Lucas Pardue <Lucas.Pardue@bbc.co.uk>, QUIC WG <quic@ietf.org>, Spencer Dawkins at IETF <spencerdawkins.ietf@gmail.com>
Message-Id: <C41FB67E-C0B7-4DFB-BAE8-616AB19D128A@unina.it>
References: <BCAD8B83-11F7-4D4A-B7B3-FCBF8B45CBB4@mnot.net> <7CF7F94CB496BF4FAB1676F375F9666A3BA7361D@bgb01xud1012> <49DC61C7-9E31-4049-84E3-112F129CBE50@mnot.net> <FAE9A7F7-C642-4AC5-B469-91BE7189F2F0@unina.it> <FFBE48EA-FD6F-42C6-B1A4-80C4CD8D9864@netapp.com>
To: "Eggert, Lars" <lars@netapp.com>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3124)
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/quic/XlNdgY3Zt5_MTi83TFPQatLoMf0>
X-BeenThere: quic@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22
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, 29 Oct 2017 10:26:45 -0000
Hi, > I don't think that's a fair summary. …it’s "my" summary. BTW, the mailing list logs are there. The IETF is a tough place to be, we all know. If it weren’t a contradiction in terms, I’d call it an “oligarchic democracy”. Simon _\\|//_ ( O-O ) ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~o00~~(_)~~00o~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Simon Pietro Romano Universita' di Napoli Federico II Computer Engineering Department Phone: +39 081 7683823 -- Fax: +39 081 7683816 e-mail: spromano@unina.it <mailto:spromano@unina.it> <<Molti mi dicono che lo scoraggiamento è l'alibi degli idioti. Ci rifletto un istante; e mi scoraggio>>. Magritte. oooO ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~( )~~~ Oooo~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ \ ( ( ) \_) ) / (_/ > On 29 Oct 2017, at 09:25, Eggert, Lars <lars@netapp.com> wrote: > > Hi, > > On 2017-10-29, at 8:01, Simon Pietro Romano <spromano@unina.it <mailto:spromano@unina.it>> wrote: >> The sad thing about multipath is that there have been people who have worked, more than one year ago, on implementing it in a v1-compliant way. Though, the group has never wanted to give multipath a real chance to survive and has always treated it as a “potential future extension”. This has been made so clear in the mailing list that we have stopped trying to push for it. > > I don't think that's a fair summary. > > First, there is no v1. We're busy specifying it at the moment, and many, many fundamental things are still changing. These are taking all the cycles the WG has at the moment, and we're still not progressing at a satisfactory pace. (Which was the message that started this thread.) I also don't think that the implementations are at a stage where they can realistically think about adding multipath - most haven't even really looked at recovery in detail. > > Multipath *is* in the charter, and we're fully committed to supporting it. I simply can't see how getting the WG working on the details at multipath at this time will help speed up work on the protocol fundamentals. And it seems that we'd need to continuously rework multipath while we're still changing protocol fundamentals, which would create additional busy work. > > Lars
- QUIC - Our schedule and scope Mark Nottingham
- Re: QUIC - Our schedule and scope Ian Swett
- Re: QUIC - Our schedule and scope Patrick McManus
- Re: QUIC - Our schedule and scope Salz, Rich
- Re: QUIC - Our schedule and scope Salz, Rich
- Re: QUIC - Our schedule and scope Eric Rescorla
- RE: QUIC - Our schedule and scope Lucas Pardue
- Re: QUIC - Our schedule and scope Eggert, Lars
- Re: QUIC - Our schedule and scope Eggert, Lars
- Re: QUIC - Our schedule and scope Willy Tarreau
- Re: QUIC - Our schedule and scope Göran Eriksson AP
- Re: QUIC - Our schedule and scope Mark Nottingham
- Re: QUIC - Our schedule and scope Mark Nottingham
- Re: QUIC - Our schedule and scope Mark Nottingham
- RE: QUIC - Our schedule and scope Mike Bishop
- Re: QUIC - Our schedule and scope Brian Trammell (IETF)
- RE: QUIC - Our schedule and scope Salvatore Loreto
- RE: QUIC - Our schedule and scope Roni Even
- RE: QUIC - Our schedule and scope Roni Even
- Re: QUIC - Our schedule and scope Eggert, Lars
- Re: QUIC - Our schedule and scope Simon Pietro Romano
- RE: QUIC - Our schedule and scope Roni Even
- Re: QUIC - Our schedule and scope Eggert, Lars
- Re: QUIC - Our schedule and scope Simon Pietro Romano
- Re: QUIC - Our schedule and scope Simon Pietro Romano
- Re: QUIC - Our schedule and scope Eggert, Lars
- Re: QUIC - Our schedule and scope Christian Huitema
- Re: QUIC - Our schedule and scope Colin Perkins
- Re: QUIC - Our schedule and scope Spencer Dawkins at IETF
- RE: QUIC - Our schedule and scope Mike Bishop
- Re: QUIC - Our schedule and scope Philipp S. Tiesel
- RE: QUIC - Our schedule and scope Roni Even
- Re: QUIC - Our schedule and scope Martin Duke
- Re: QUIC - Our schedule and scope Eggert, Lars
- Re: QUIC - Our schedule and scope Olivier Bonaventure
- RE: QUIC - Our schedule and scope Lubashev, Igor
- Re: QUIC - Our schedule and scope Quentin De Coninck
- Re: QUIC - Our schedule and scope Ian Swett
- RE: QUIC - Our schedule and scope Lubashev, Igor
- Re: QUIC - Our schedule and scope Ian Swett
- RE: QUIC - Our schedule and scope Roni Even
- Re: QUIC - Our schedule and scope Bernard Aboba
- Re: QUIC - Our schedule and scope Colin Perkins
- Re: QUIC - Our schedule and scope Joerg Ott