Re: New Version Notification for draft-huitema-quic-mpath-req-00.txt

Yoshifumi Nishida <nishida@sfc.wide.ad.jp> Thu, 28 December 2017 10:04 UTC

Return-Path: <nishida@sfc.wide.ad.jp>
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 68B2412D86C for <quic@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 28 Dec 2017 02:04:38 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.649
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.649 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, HTML_OBFUSCATE_05_10=0.26, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.01, 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 wDpAIiASVn0L for <quic@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 28 Dec 2017 02:04:35 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail.sfc.wide.ad.jp (shonan.sfc.wide.ad.jp [IPv6:2001:200:0:8803::53]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 41328126B6D for <quic@ietf.org>; Thu, 28 Dec 2017 02:04:34 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail-wm0-f49.google.com (mail-wm0-f49.google.com [74.125.82.49]) by mail.sfc.wide.ad.jp (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id D3CB3278263 for <quic@ietf.org>; Thu, 28 Dec 2017 19:04:31 +0900 (JST)
Received: by mail-wm0-f49.google.com with SMTP id r78so43338463wme.5 for <quic@ietf.org>; Thu, 28 Dec 2017 02:04:31 -0800 (PST)
X-Gm-Message-State: AKGB3mKZRtcgq/VeUnnJX+V6JabtZr8SIZpuAxhG1vX8HQyn0FOFVro7 +rZgINhS0QqEKnmAB3/2BVCVD46DrlsgPCFcQRQ=
X-Google-Smtp-Source: ACJfBotqMdY4vLU33mG3l+TZNI9M4RtQKUy7Uk8evHsQDYCu9aw0schKdTlqx2YdgG4A+CSjQYvDDSj9WdtoL/QKvkU=
X-Received: by 10.28.149.203 with SMTP id x194mr25815507wmd.145.1514455469830; Thu, 28 Dec 2017 02:04:29 -0800 (PST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.223.147.199 with HTTP; Thu, 28 Dec 2017 02:04:28 -0800 (PST)
In-Reply-To: <1728cfeb-e2ce-61cd-9a4e-770d76816fff@huitema.net>
References: <151440883747.29897.3176327891691875461.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> <1728cfeb-e2ce-61cd-9a4e-770d76816fff@huitema.net>
From: Yoshifumi Nishida <nishida@sfc.wide.ad.jp>
Date: Thu, 28 Dec 2017 02:04:28 -0800
X-Gmail-Original-Message-ID: <CAO249ydRz7WROxPB=4B7pXV7auwEopL2gVmZs1u9YXdnkdz64w@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <CAO249ydRz7WROxPB=4B7pXV7auwEopL2gVmZs1u9YXdnkdz64w@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: New Version Notification for draft-huitema-quic-mpath-req-00.txt
To: Christian Huitema <huitema@huitema.net>
Cc: "quic@ietf.org" <quic@ietf.org>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="001a1148eb984eb9b1056163a4c3"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/quic/gEP0f5YVzSygqwJXZ-umnfFM0T0>
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: Thu, 28 Dec 2017 10:04:38 -0000

Hi Chritian,

I think this is a useful doc, but I might want to clarify one thing in the
following text.

   Since different paths experience different network conditions, it
   follows that congestion control should be executed separately for
   each path, just like it is executed separately for each subflow in
   MPTCP [RFC6824].

MPTCP measures ACKs, losses and delays on each path, however, adjusting
transfer rate in MPTCP is governed by coupled congestion control. So, it
seems to me that this is not very precise expression for MPTCP.
I think the draft needs to clarify this point.
Also, I believe QUIC should follow the same principle.

Thanks,
--
Yoshi






On Wed, Dec 27, 2017 at 1:11 PM, Christian Huitema <huitema@huitema.net>
wrote:

> Yes, I know full well that multipath is not in scope for V1. But since we
> are dabbling in connection migration anyhow, I thought we could just as
> well have a document listing multipath requirements and issues...
>
> -- Christian Huitema
>
>
> -------- Forwarded Message --------
> Subject: New Version Notification for draft-huitema-quic-mpath-req-00.txt
> Date: Wed, 27 Dec 2017 13:07:17 -0800
> From: internet-drafts@ietf.org
> To: Christian Huitema <huitema@huitema.net> <huitema@huitema.net>
>
> A new version of I-D, draft-huitema-quic-mpath-req-00.txt
> has been successfully submitted by Christian Huitema and posted to the
> IETF repository.
>
> Name:		draft-huitema-quic-mpath-req
> Revision:	00
> Title:		QUIC Multipath Requirements
> Document date:	2017-12-27
> Group:		Individual Submission
> Pages:		11
> URL:            https://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-huitema-quic-mpath-req-00.txt
> Status:         https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-huitema-quic-mpath-req/
> Htmlized:       https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-huitema-quic-mpath-req-00
> Htmlized:       https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-huitema-quic-mpath-req-00
>
>
> Abstract:
>    This document describes the requirement and plausible architecture of
>    QUIC multipath extensions.  While the first version of QUIC is not
>    scheduled to include multipath extensions, there are risks that
>    decisions made in this first version might preclude some options that
>    we may later find attractive.  An early review of multipath extension
>    requirements and issues should minimize that risk.
>
>
>
>
> 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
>
>
>