IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: Multipath Milestones

Jana Iyengar <jri@google.com> Wed, 14 February 2018 21:33 UTC

Return-Path: <jri@google.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 851FE126DED for <quic@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 14 Feb 2018 13:33:21 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.71
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.71 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.01] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=google.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 EoPcBX2NtXHa for <quic@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 14 Feb 2018 13:33:19 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail-yw0-x22a.google.com (mail-yw0-x22a.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4002:c05::22a]) (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 599CC126C0F for <quic@ietf.org>; Wed, 14 Feb 2018 13:33:19 -0800 (PST)
Received: by mail-yw0-x22a.google.com with SMTP id b16so15799108ywh.12 for <quic@ietf.org>; Wed, 14 Feb 2018 13:33:19 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=Xy2y/yKQdtCSsOZc+Mw8NFUS1QBCUnhj8rU5gMBjN3Q=; b=JvvJmIS/JY2qwDftlVEL6ReOCZo7b+WFTNzYT0+AjYniwdzW1ykDH6Buz5V5/t3AhP yPP+Ek4DxZe9yUsxuSEJUAJ7Ainx7C9r8OEFdjkULBji/atPVwR5wEPW6vTgrK9IZwHV HqpXy8WWU2Z0XicFqAQvSP5SGFBr3hoOI6bbXRgSVwplwjx+aDJE6M17FCGALBlPjPbb uRJ0EvY2WFPjw5nGbPHNPGVou1hymqmL3oTI2WP8LON+fDCz5g8H6AKC7Hhm4uPSbrRt y4GSuvod3TS6Y0IviXX/FEjHHT4szYJSmljPYzQxaNr/U49okTe2rvCRxI5vPZLo9QF8 jtkw==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=Xy2y/yKQdtCSsOZc+Mw8NFUS1QBCUnhj8rU5gMBjN3Q=; b=L3wDS7Q1L6Py4EDhiHRLhzkMvJMrV1VqB6YXWVSdSdUVyjPodo90Hl2TOfG335sf70 elDQQQFHeU5TmRNNEa7cLvZbJCIuJWrwsyTEl7ic/XGCx4hcyYgxa3HW+cAiZUhs6Jms WI9dOVCkzE03TW+nEqwt46/R1TUl2q8Agxy51YE5DP8nSd8BDne8AO6+/7jJYqehDvD3 29A+s2wYHHlTwHcw+GIpB6NzgKqzhH+5TAobM1G1vbKNw0DvFq8PXiinjejBqbsZwE2O BLP5+iSQ7yn6claqSGaNmbPzmcb/1UaPk072+byK0Ry3Eyce+TXCAHISdWQ/gmnXhbaT ntLQ==
X-Gm-Message-State: APf1xPCoP0gSTbYExPY65WGV9qyL/3+3A7r4RWAxB/XJekhkzryCL1FR F+e6aQq4ZSYRsvQQEVQAhPVVousz2yPeqvTgAVXYYw==
X-Google-Smtp-Source: AH8x225cUU8To940ORMm0zGcnd5/fsuEvfPkAr7yjWvBVMvclF3nWLaS21B1V9icRLIVpJcQ5oEy3Eew0UGcK9jekcY=
X-Received: by 10.37.104.13 with SMTP id d13mr512504ybc.290.1518643998004; Wed, 14 Feb 2018 13:33:18 -0800 (PST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 2002:a25:9012:0:0:0:0:0 with HTTP; Wed, 14 Feb 2018 13:33:17 -0800 (PST)
In-Reply-To: <CAKcm_gO4gc-iek4_VKi+ekyUyWTQ0Pt-wmr=zvXdGezzXDBiNA@mail.gmail.com>
References: <7CF7F94CB496BF4FAB1676F375F9666A3BAE0BEA@bgb01xud1012> <DE0B9AF2-915C-42A0-85E4-C419782D46B5@netapp.com> <CAKcm_gO4gc-iek4_VKi+ekyUyWTQ0Pt-wmr=zvXdGezzXDBiNA@mail.gmail.com>
From: Jana Iyengar <jri@google.com>
Date: Wed, 14 Feb 2018 13:33:17 -0800
Message-ID: <CAGD1bZZgx4O54vFO-O1ZHsWbzYuOp4ne4d33HCd67f8K7coPEQ@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: Multipath Milestones
To: Ian Swett <ianswett@google.com>
Cc: "Eggert, Lars" <lars@netapp.com>, Lucas Pardue <Lucas.Pardue@bbc.co.uk>, QUIC WG <quic@ietf.org>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="f403045c00200b5360056532dc90"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/quic/qf5HjNAn9PGQm8_42xYAKrhUK8o>
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: Wed, 14 Feb 2018 21:33:21 -0000

I agree with Lars and Ian, and I presume this was left out inadvertently.

Lars: maybe the chairs could come up with a "fix" to the milestones and do
a consensus call?

On Wed, Feb 14, 2018 at 11:22 AM, Ian Swett <ianswett@google.com> wrote:

> Lars, that was my interpretation as well.
>
> I think the right path forward is for those particularly interested in
> multipath to experiment with QUIC extensions inside v1, once the extension
> mechanism is defined.  Once some experimentation has happened, we'll be in
> a better place to have an informed discussion about some of the points
> Christian raised in his multipath requirements draft:
> https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-huitema-quic-mpath-req-01
>
> The recent text being added about Connection Migration should lay some of
> the groundwork for adding second paths. https://github.com/quic
> wg/base-drafts/pull/1012
>
> On Wed, Feb 14, 2018 at 2:14 PM, Eggert, Lars <lars@netapp.com> wrote:
>
>> Hi,
>>
>> On 2018-2-14, at 15:49, Lucas Pardue <Lucas.Pardue@bbc.co.uk> wrote:
>>
>> This might be a bit pedantic but when the milestones were adjusted back
>> in December, the Multipath extension milestones were left as originally
>> stated (Nov ’17, May ’19).
>>
>> Is there any intention to modify these? The Nov ’17 adoption has
>> obviously been missed and I’m wondering what I would tell someone less
>> familiar with the WG when they hypothetically asks me what that means.
>>
>>
>> yes, we need to update those milestones.
>>
>> I can't recall that we explicitly discussed this when we discussed
>> pushing the base-drafts milestones back. But to me personally, the decision
>> to focus all efforts on v1 - and multipath not being part of v1 -
>> implicitly meant that we'd not really start any real effort before the
>> base-drafts are shipped off to the IESG. In other words, WG adoption would
>> probably not happen before Nov 2018, and completion sometime in 2019 (?).
>>
>> As I said, this is my personal interpretation - it would be good to know
>> if this is the WG consensus.
>>
>> Lars
>>
>
>

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email