Re: Fwd: New Version Notification for draft-dawkins-quic-multipath-questions-00.txt
Behcet Sarikaya <sarikaya2012@gmail.com> Mon, 07 December 2020 16:44 UTC
Return-Path: <sarikaya2012@gmail.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 C3A9B3A160C for <quic@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 7 Dec 2020 08:44:20 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.847
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.847 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, FREEMAIL_ENVFROM_END_DIGIT=0.25, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com
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 1TpIEwP7h7W3 for <quic@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 7 Dec 2020 08:44:18 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail-yb1-xb32.google.com (mail-yb1-xb32.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::b32]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 62CA93A1602 for <quic@ietf.org>; Mon, 7 Dec 2020 08:44:18 -0800 (PST)
Received: by mail-yb1-xb32.google.com with SMTP id o71so13560197ybc.2 for <quic@ietf.org>; Mon, 07 Dec 2020 08:44:18 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:reply-to:from:date:message-id :subject:to:cc; bh=DCBMF48ElwNA1Si+EaJsolC6Uy5InsS+1v8Pp2zxjVA=; b=CujUF4xwnGw0XD4okrFDfvQkXjX07cwlRZJtB4q3+5l7wHyyX4gCOgVSMdQySWD5iE d7JmIkpxQ3oxRqEn/OD2Ak2B7aKjk5UIjuFDiTN7EOtM4z5vZcj36CSAd20KHiYhtnCq aT2V2zydKpp47g6riY3eV4ErshuUMunVl8rxRMZDeURQjfFBQl+BzqGU/MN78GbAXFg0 XElr6Z4zAgR1htvBXMwf8lI5YeNCmVHDcTWgHP4lq3sQ++HcOWC7RnGsUHvKn+6njNyR oxkur1va646bbs5T9pYKyG+Co5bfhiAcicqtwqbxxJ7Xf1y+xsrFE8P/1be94Z4c5Wbt Q2eQ==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:reply-to :from:date:message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=DCBMF48ElwNA1Si+EaJsolC6Uy5InsS+1v8Pp2zxjVA=; b=LlPMwEO6NOZlx9Tfp7udyJCaPNgxUlZOkVhT18rBB+WXBAymWkfI5pC1t8P9m+7lKf kTaDni75OkEF1FoCpouQY9vjwVSNFvnM7oEKtjA7fFVtrXrgsZYtQbmBvNZHPCBkIYqw SALj7w4AsuQJ3zZkgob00mUmXhMuJMAoCaWdvyPYoiQHzrYVUWeLV2qXK44hl006RSFG 5/NmjJhHzJPCQqlcKoL6sAFdlmIydDzmRboMwcOneZVWOkcHvQMST/gMTAU0j4B26KZH REFUQIicNyZDZZlitwkXhrg1VOYjLNizZ6NHYa4TRqExOCVeHQuiHYUYq0sK8TTBYz2o O+vA==
X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM5313bz18QNI3KSJmD2YCE/xepqvzMMWX6xFlvJItDMV1YE7+CPHS lbVAxnNjdtWZUiE9Hem+5K3weviqUEjeDL5Y7tE=
X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJzwGw1MNqMdVvYokAmfLIreuQOjFkn2VNxtZ3BztNgZz9YP/X8ctoPE/+Jcf9amUwUl7mgdg8iDr4NPi07DmEw=
X-Received: by 2002:a25:cad2:: with SMTP id a201mr23684738ybg.327.1607359457641; Mon, 07 Dec 2020 08:44:17 -0800 (PST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <160731832334.29236.7841084320182421518@ietfa.amsl.com> <CAKKJt-fHi_3HLvK4u2JbnmW_snT3qpVuiavKru5wM2hygNYJGQ@mail.gmail.com> <CAN1APdcUOt_wRf4qt6JeqBJrYrxkcihM4pGCuEohVy0b1OQf3g@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CAN1APdcUOt_wRf4qt6JeqBJrYrxkcihM4pGCuEohVy0b1OQf3g@mail.gmail.com>
Reply-To: sarikaya@ieee.org
From: Behcet Sarikaya <sarikaya2012@gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 07 Dec 2020 10:44:06 -0600
Message-ID: <CAC8QAcf-xzc382b4hBAiYb6MpF4JPCedS5EDp26SNpNUjWnJxQ@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: Fwd: New Version Notification for draft-dawkins-quic-multipath-questions-00.txt
To: Mikkel Fahnøe Jørgensen <mikkelfj@gmail.com>
Cc: Spencer Dawkins at IETF <spencerdawkins.ietf@gmail.com>, IETF QUIC WG <quic@ietf.org>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="0000000000007fc67505b5e289f8"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/quic/nMB11YWOSuL1qEDiUVymOYm_ve4>
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: Mon, 07 Dec 2020 16:44:28 -0000
On Mon, Dec 7, 2020 at 2:09 AM Mikkel Fahnøe Jørgensen <mikkelfj@gmail.com> wrote: > Thanks for working on this. > > I’m still looking for a discussion on symmetric vs assymmetric multipath. > > Today in QUIC v1 only the client can migrate. > Is multipath going to be the same, or can both endpoints initiate multiple > paths? > > I think symmetric vs asymmetric makes some difference. For example in ATSSS, maybe we can assume UPF does not move. Maybe we can even assume UE also does not move because then it would be difficult to access the fixed network path. Even in symmetric scenarios, I don't see much value of migration because in case of migration, it will no longer be multipath, i.e. UE can no longer access WiFi. Behcet Behcet > > Kind Regards, > Mikkel Fahnøe Jørgensen > > > On 7 December 2020 at 06.27.12, Spencer Dawkins at IETF ( > spencerdawkins.ietf@gmail.com) wrote: > > Dear QUIC working group, > > We've exchanged a lot of e-mail about what support for multiple paths in > QUIC might look like on the mailing list, and talked about this at the > October virtual interim meeting and at the QUIC session at IETF 109, and it > seemed good to me, to try to summarize the discussions we've had so far. > > Because this topic is of interest outside the IETF, I thought it better to > put the summary in an Internet Draft, than somewhere in Github issues or > Slack, or on the mailing list. > > I also want to apologize in advance if I've misstated things - if so, > please let me know. I'd point out this text in the draft: > > Please note well that this document reflects the author's current > understanding of working group discussions. It is likely that there > are more questions than currently included in the document, and it is > even more likely that some of the suggested answers are incomplete or > (unlike the people in Section 1.1) completely wrong. Contributions > that add or improve questions and answers are welcomed, as described > in Section 1.4. > > As always, Do The Right Thing. > > Best, > > Spencer > > ---------- Forwarded message --------- > From: <internet-drafts@ietf.org> > Date: Sun, Dec 6, 2020 at 11:18 PM > Subject: New Version Notification for > draft-dawkins-quic-multipath-questions-00.txt > To: Spencer Dawkins <spencerdawkins.ietf@gmail.com> > > > > A new version of I-D, draft-dawkins-quic-multipath-questions-00.txt > has been successfully submitted by Spencer Dawkins and posted to the > IETF repository. > > Name: draft-dawkins-quic-multipath-questions > Revision: 00 > Title: Questions for Multiple Paths In QUIC > Document date: 2020-12-06 > Group: Individual Submission > Pages: 13 > URL: > https://www.ietf.org/archive/id/draft-dawkins-quic-multipath-questions-00.txt > Status: > https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-dawkins-quic-multipath-questions/ > Htmlized: > https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-dawkins-quic-multipath-questions > Htmlized: > https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-dawkins-quic-multipath-questions-00 > > > Abstract: > The IETF QUIC working group has been chartered to produce extensions > that would "enable ... multipath capabilities" since the working > group was formed in 2016, but because multipath was an extension, > work on multipath, and the other extensions named in the charter, > waited while work proceeded on the core QUIC protocol specifications. > > After the QUIC working group chairs requested publication for the > core QUIC protocol specifications, they scheduled a virtual interim > meeting to understand the use cases that various groups inside and > outside the IETF were envisioning for multipath with QUIC. > > As part of that discussion, it became obvious that people had a > variety of ideas about how multiple paths would be used, because they > weren't looking at the same use cases, and so had different > assumptions about how applications might use QUIC over multiple > paths. > > This document is intended to capture questions that have come up in > discussions, with some suggested answers, to inform further > discussion in the working group. > > > > > 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 > > >
- Fwd: New Version Notification for draft-dawkins-q… Spencer Dawkins at IETF
- Re: Fwd: New Version Notification for draft-dawki… Mikkel Fahnøe Jørgensen
- Re: New Version Notification for draft-dawkins-qu… Lars Eggert
- Re: New Version Notification for draft-dawkins-qu… Spencer Dawkins at IETF
- RE: Fwd: New Version Notification for draft-dawki… Mike Bishop
- Re: Fwd: New Version Notification for draft-dawki… Behcet Sarikaya
- Re: Fwd: New Version Notification for draft-dawki… Mikkel Fahnøe Jørgensen