IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: Agenda items for IETF 109

Lars Eggert <lars@eggert.org> Thu, 29 October 2020 15:35 UTC

Return-Path: <lars@eggert.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 CCB953A0A4E; Thu, 29 Oct 2020 08:35:30 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.099
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.099 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, 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 (1024-bit key) header.d=eggert.org
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 ATBJ19y5l_iZ; Thu, 29 Oct 2020 08:35:29 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail.eggert.org (mail.eggert.org [IPv6:2a00:ac00:4000:400:211:32ff:fe22:186f]) (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 97B193A0A62; Thu, 29 Oct 2020 08:35:29 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [IPv6:2a00:ac00:4000:400:a9ca:371c:ae9a:38ef] (unknown [IPv6:2a00:ac00:4000:400:a9ca:371c:ae9a:38ef]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail.eggert.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 0368561078D; Thu, 29 Oct 2020 17:35:15 +0200 (EET)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=eggert.org; s=dkim; t=1603985716; bh=/NPyhBHlJyV8jAFPc5JQE/0JKy4VkpMRpTaXEYEu5uE=; h=From:Subject:Date:In-Reply-To:Cc:To:References; b=CBOseRtMWw/p5PK0VP2FMz3b31n6WoMra6qdER0/gs1svKS90OvoJtLS/C7n4kjXn sJB2yi/N+B5Jl5XzKrLpnp5SunFXY3d5uHaCbDCyeU6dSBrre3kwX3idh98IhmHmM3 J6H0Z9rXTdpXs2VgZzay05BKIvjK4qrHEcALGFzo=
From: Lars Eggert <lars@eggert.org>
Message-Id: <4435FA0E-698D-4EBD-AE35-B63F4DAD4F94@eggert.org>
Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="Apple-Mail=_FBBB84A2-E23F-47AA-94DF-8FFECCBF6DA5"; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; micalg="pgp-sha512"
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 13.4 \(3608.120.23.2.4\))
Subject: Re: Agenda items for IETF 109
Date: Thu, 29 Oct 2020 17:35:15 +0200
In-Reply-To: <CAKKJt-eOf9FFfPDmovQJi8T-7fs+B2rdynxKTiLGMcMhgyQMHg@mail.gmail.com>
Cc: WG Chairs <quic-chairs@ietf.org>, IETF QUIC WG <quic@ietf.org>
To: Spencer Dawkins at IETF <spencerdawkins.ietf@gmail.com>
References: <A7AE63D7-D0A8-4EA1-A21A-23D81339189D@eggert.org> <CAKKJt-eOf9FFfPDmovQJi8T-7fs+B2rdynxKTiLGMcMhgyQMHg@mail.gmail.com>
X-MailScanner-ID: 0368561078D.A2E97
X-MailScanner: Found to be clean
X-MailScanner-From: lars@eggert.org
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/quic/phcIAwhxCsLfYHegdf03dTys6qc>
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: Thu, 29 Oct 2020 15:35:31 -0000

Hi,

On 2020-10-27, at 21:50, Spencer Dawkins at IETF <spencerdawkins.ietf@gmail.com> wrote:
> Lars, you mentioned at the end of the virtual interim that we could have more conversations "like this", which I took to mean "at least one more virtual interim meeting on multipath".

due to scheduling constraints, there is no possibility to schedule another interim before 109.

I'd ask that people continue discussing the topic on the list, with the goal of articulating a few options of what to do about multipath that we could then further discuss and eventually do a consensus call on.

We plan on leaving some time on the agenda during 109 for this, but due to the ongoing LC on the base drafts and needing to push forward with currently-adopted WG items, it's a bit unclear whether this plan will pan out.

It would IMO be worthwhile to schedule another interim on multipath (soon) after 109, but I'd like the mailing list discussion to progress towards plans for what to do about the topic - I don't think another interim on usec cases and requirements would be very productive.

Thanks,
Lars

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email