Re: Preparing for discussion on what to do about the multipath extension milestone (was: Re: IETF Last Call for QUIC)

[Behcet Sarikaya <[e-mail]>]

On Sun, Sep 27, 2020 at 11:08 AM Spencer Dawkins at IETF <
[e-mail]> wrote:

> Dear QUIC working group,
>
> On Fri, Sep 25, 2020 at 5:00 AM Lars Eggert <[e-mail]> wrote:
>
>> In parallel to progressing the "base drafts" towards RFC publications,
>> the WG should now also begin to pick up the pace on our other adopted work
>> items (ops drafts, extensions, etc.)
>>
>> One important other discussion item is what to do about the multipath
>> extension milestone, which some have suggested should be dropped, while
>> others still show interest to pursue it.
>>
>
> So, I'd like to understand the suggestion to drop this milestone, before I
> start trying to discuss that suggestion :-).
>
> In conversations with individual folk, I've heard these concerns about
> QUIC multipath:
>
> - Whether it will be possible to evaluate multipath performance at scale,
> both for evaluating proposals and testing implementations.
>

I saw evaluations  of individual implementations, I don't know if they have
an mpquic test suite but I think, there is some for quic interoperability
testing. These could be scaled easily (!), I think.

>
> - The complexity involved in making decisions dynamically about which path
> to send a given packet on (which could be a research topic, given certain
> constraints and goals).
>
> This should be answered by implementers. 3GPP is eager to standardize
mpquic for 5G ATSSS which is basically traffic steering, i.e. telling
where/which path to steer the packet based on operators business policies,
etc.

Regards,
Behcet

> If I've misunderstood or misquoted, my apologies, of course. Please
> correct me.
>
> What other concerns do people have? I'd like to get all the objections out
> at the beginning of the discussion.
>
> Thanks!
>
> Spencer
>