Re: [QUIC] Alissa Cooper's Yes on charter-ietf-quic-00-01: (with COMMENT)
Jana Iyengar <jri@google.com> Tue, 13 September 2016 03:37 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 E8E4012B1CC for <quic@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 12 Sep 2016 20:37:02 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -4.208
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.208 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, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-1.508, SPF_PASS=-0.001] 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 7rF9FK1rqQ4s for <quic@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 12 Sep 2016 20:37:00 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-vk0-x236.google.com (mail-vk0-x236.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:400c:c05::236]) (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 1FDF812B1A8 for <quic@ietf.org>; Mon, 12 Sep 2016 20:37:00 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-vk0-x236.google.com with SMTP id m62so107986214vkd.3 for <quic@ietf.org>; Mon, 12 Sep 2016 20:37:00 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=G7kBmCPt38s6YJlNk6lKeeZtnEzAd0sCmpspMvIlU7M=; b=ohw3dCmtRaNq7VEGusfoq+g/nE5ZLMOEKa8j7/bZ0Ql9B7GTenF6l2/AIrJByJkimH WferA8IobhXYs5Ep6ZVZxvUeGT2QlJVlPRwDvOpdFTGq11xNaMMwCNct8FMo3ErQsh/1 tSoGhBk0N0oetBEjxa3GdUecalNM+VRHrpkDQNmE+u+8XcMmaeMnctsG7dLish7I/IpY T0WFNxRpOaJV0tKkdCunTa6BMxneCTdXZz+sKzltPwwfqFscRsKIFUf7xT/qtUrk2gwX IiDsjPzphURbh+ubPcKqIprK4cPvY/FRnDMeMlz1OfiGvc5lqU4T54tPB8sKmcToneRy q/pA==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=G7kBmCPt38s6YJlNk6lKeeZtnEzAd0sCmpspMvIlU7M=; b=Rg/WG6/tyuz4Z9nfgp1yA3rJvaFZhXQZA3sR94sF5E5XC02qz7L3JKKA77/jo4+KoD xFTgUeRbzL9doxJm9zGCQR/d4zn0yjTnR+CVAI46bmHs4M0QrGcTqELgcZR4h+A5a4I7 LGy2uK3UI4ObbdchnZQfkwc8xdGoTdm10aMHCGf49G5PlqGWnzQf/ncg/oZVvZwc5Bw3 HQNODacsHY5aTEzaU61vVnbL2SlAokrIUZXc4MRAjZ5l+Kdi6PcvWNl8uTNGc7xzFX97 r9IbHp0EqJgL3GOMZGcksmT+UDdrP9xIIgPxkdmaOVWbFaI5fd3l2diHrrgaF/gb9yF1 AYUg==
X-Gm-Message-State: AE9vXwOVtfLu1ZHwAu58qL7ANGovigjg5RZnRDEJ9dZiTlLCVjzx+KAJNtZr0DW8uHSLKkYStHU5ivRWR7sIlN2S
X-Received: by 10.31.7.73 with SMTP id 70mr15353414vkh.157.1473737819026; Mon, 12 Sep 2016 20:36:59 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.103.116.130 with HTTP; Mon, 12 Sep 2016 20:36:58 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <CABcZeBNDGQT141+9Q-YJRsuVrWGD=SDdeeFaKe0=iNwb+1ckLQ@mail.gmail.com>
References: <147273767703.10217.5299850397860146217.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> <CAKKJt-dE_q2iNFLn_BFqPoy1V4kBnxGkbAiGzjyFkDdj6+gMBw@mail.gmail.com> <CABcZeBNDGQT141+9Q-YJRsuVrWGD=SDdeeFaKe0=iNwb+1ckLQ@mail.gmail.com>
From: Jana Iyengar <jri@google.com>
Date: Mon, 12 Sep 2016 20:36:58 -0700
Message-ID: <CAGD1bZbEauJk-LBJkMzQCCtkkEhi--btk=yXM0Nu1SSZofTyxA@mail.gmail.com>
To: Eric Rescorla <ekr@rtfm.com>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="001a1143d70c325737053c5b5311"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/quic/yjTRcPe9j9ncVrmvRD2xKj5F0Xs>
Cc: quic-chairs@ietf.org, quic@ietf.org, Alissa Cooper <alissa@cooperw.in>, Spencer Dawkins at IETF <spencerdawkins.ietf@gmail.com>, The IESG <iesg@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [QUIC] Alissa Cooper's Yes on charter-ietf-quic-00-01: (with COMMENT)
X-BeenThere: quic@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17
Precedence: list
List-Id: Mailing list to discuss QUIC standardization <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: Tue, 13 Sep 2016 03:37:03 -0000
On Mon, Sep 12, 2016 at 4:39 PM, Eric Rescorla <ekr@rtfm.com> wrote: > I had a few comments on the draft charter: > > > There is emerging implementation and deployment experience with QUIC, a > > UDP-based protocol that provides a stream-multiplexing encrypted > transport. > > Based on that implementation and deployment experience, the QUIC working > group > > will provide a standards track specification generalizing the design > described > > in the initial set of draft-tsvwg-quic-protocol, draft-tsvwg-quic > -loss-recovery, > > and related documents. > > "initial set" is ungrammatical here. Strike it. > > > > Key goals for QUIC are: > > > > - Minimizing connection establishment and overall transport latency for > > applications, starting with HTTP/2; > > - Providing multiplexing without head-of-line blocking; > > - Enabling deployment over unmodified Internet paths; and > > - Enabling multipath and forward error correction extensions. > > I would like to see a security objective here, as I think we all agree > that it's a first-class priority. > > - Providing secure transport by default using TLS 1.3. > > > > This work will ensure that > > QUIC using TLS1.3 has security and privacy properties that are at least > as good > > as a stack composed of TLS1.3 using TCP (or MPTCP when using multipath). > > This "QUIC using TLS 1.3" language is a little weird. I would just say > "QUIC". I believe MT provided a similar comment. > At the moment, QUIC is being defined in the initial docs to be the transport protocol that requires a handshake mechanism. This is why the TLS1.3 mapping document exists separate from the QUIC document. It would be odd to just say QUIC if you mean QUIC + TLS1.3. > The third focus area will describe mappings between specific > applications??? > > semantics and the transport facilities of QUIC. The first mapping will > be a > > description of HTTP/2 semantics using QUIC, specifically with the goal > of > > minimizing web latency using QUIC. This mapping will accommodate the > extension > > mechanisms defined in the HTTP/2 specification. Upon completion of that > mapping, > > additional protocols may be added by updating this charter to include > them. > > I'm not sure this should be in QUIC so much as HTTP. Minimally it somehow > needs to be in cooperation and I don't see anything here. I certainly don't > want this to preclude a mapping of only HTTP/2's transport facilities. > I don't expect this work to necessarily show up in the QUIC wg later, but there may be parts of this work that do show up. I think there's value in stating that other apps will be considered in the future, but I don't have a strong opinion on what the charter should say about work that is to be done post re-charter. Can you send a PR? > -Ekr > > > On Thu, Sep 1, 2016 at 7:02 AM, Spencer Dawkins at IETF < > spencerdawkins.ietf@gmail.com> wrote: > >> Hi, Alissa, >> >> On Thu, Sep 1, 2016 at 8:47 AM, Alissa Cooper <alissa@cooperw.in> wrote: >> >>> Alissa Cooper has entered the following ballot position for >>> charter-ietf-quic-00-01: Yes >>> >>> When responding, please keep the subject line intact and reply to all >>> email addresses included in the To and CC lines. (Feel free to cut this >>> introductory paragraph, however.) >>> >>> >>> >>> The document, along with other ballot positions, can be found here: >>> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/charter-ietf-quic/ >>> >>> >>> >>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------- >>> COMMENT: >>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------- >>> >>> What is the status of these PRs? >>> https://github.com/IETF-QUIC/Charter/pulls >> >> >> I checked two of the PRs. One looks like it's reflected in the >> datatracker, but the other does not. I'll make sure the proponents think >> the datatracker text reflects what they want to go with, before this goes >> for external review. >> >> Spencer >> >> _______________________________________________ >> QUIC mailing list >> QUIC@ietf.org >> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/quic >> >> > > _______________________________________________ > QUIC mailing list > QUIC@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/quic > >
- [QUIC] Alissa Cooper's Yes on charter-ietf-quic-0… Alissa Cooper
- Re: [QUIC] Alissa Cooper's Yes on charter-ietf-qu… Spencer Dawkins at IETF
- Re: [QUIC] Alissa Cooper's Yes on charter-ietf-qu… Eric Rescorla
- Re: [QUIC] Alissa Cooper's Yes on charter-ietf-qu… Martin Thomson
- Re: [QUIC] Alissa Cooper's Yes on charter-ietf-qu… Ryan Hamilton
- Re: [QUIC] Alissa Cooper's Yes on charter-ietf-qu… Salz, Rich
- Re: [QUIC] Alissa Cooper's Yes on charter-ietf-qu… Jana Iyengar
- Re: [QUIC] Alissa Cooper's Yes on charter-ietf-qu… Jana Iyengar
- Re: [QUIC] Alissa Cooper's Yes on charter-ietf-qu… Jim Roskind
- Re: [QUIC] Alissa Cooper's Yes on charter-ietf-qu… Salz, Rich
- Re: [QUIC] Alissa Cooper's Yes on charter-ietf-qu… Spencer Dawkins at IETF
- Re: [QUIC] Alissa Cooper's Yes on charter-ietf-qu… Eric Rescorla
- Re: [QUIC] Alissa Cooper's Yes on charter-ietf-qu… Spencer Dawkins at IETF
- Re: [QUIC] Alissa Cooper's Yes on charter-ietf-qu… Spencer Dawkins at IETF
- Re: [QUIC] Alissa Cooper's Yes on charter-ietf-qu… Ryan Hamilton
- Re: [QUIC] Alissa Cooper's Yes on charter-ietf-qu… Jana Iyengar