IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: Proposed response to Liaison Statement "LS on need for Multi-Path QUIC for ATSSS"

Spencer Dawkins at IETF <spencerdawkins.ietf@gmail.com> Wed, 29 April 2020 17:58 UTC

Return-Path: <spencerdawkins.ietf@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 0FE153A15F7 for <quic@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 29 Apr 2020 10:58:28 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.097
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.097 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_FROM=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=unavailable 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 3d9kaGE_Mxm0 for <quic@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 29 Apr 2020 10:58:25 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-lj1-x231.google.com (mail-lj1-x231.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4864:20::231]) (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 B3A6B3A15FE for <quic@ietf.org>; Wed, 29 Apr 2020 10:58:03 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-lj1-x231.google.com with SMTP id h4so3556038ljg.12 for <quic@ietf.org>; Wed, 29 Apr 2020 10:58:03 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=F42VflC1zDLH7+80QwMPcxjGtPKHOe3WUlTWj1leVms=; b=XeLGaVHIu4BD4zOZ8bca82o31b1OJhWfEGrncrUBDadTHTgqQWEBZ94t6pA2lkbZ0f ARIirIqcgqSzns44+oUIop5ETLkfNcFyx6lZClRT9XCwzq4aH3Zr660ggDbeu6mRc0bV tuS1OIpm5d33JISHFmzwOfV2+kAAy4TcYfCXsA6Oozef3w8979m4WvdQMW2VFHBznAAZ /4XFr6G5vUiQ36sLxBszdnbya3g+E3ycoebTQypD9jU+cGke66MZx2dy3stRDA3iyGzX vqy9a+ROeCEypRqjkCIGVQoEZ7kiMdICWdMTvRR6s/VrCEMX8Hb0XFL7lXjHRvYMsgXP uXXQ==
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:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=F42VflC1zDLH7+80QwMPcxjGtPKHOe3WUlTWj1leVms=; b=cQfzhUmuX8wAoFg6ZZLPZeNiyhJSbKWUaSMJqWHf4HaQRKeChgqx2NaSpoRjHCQqys Uh3lwsKqPp6gWjeumIbzCDBdKYLm7MtHwSSS4LM3ewehzR7hRlzdMP7+ri+9nf/j0KGR mo76rbGL0ru9Mh5NdmfX5fDJGJM5VV8nMGtvOTX5f9mOgRAyMYE6CJylUmDs3sh/c/G0 IlJRn7a+7U8IDvkm/zYoPa9V803iQ4ZWqLGZYKzeebzRrYWuFZ1bRu4Z75HYwV8cWWDr c1/+3yaWhnd3QNsjReRz0X2/q5cf+/nloQh0AhmLPqdEnExZQCTh6akcmFxcJqPLvdHv xTlQ==
X-Gm-Message-State: AGi0PuZGrBF3vsFPWoV44ltDtZCLTELnyKf6h9GbZbdB7BMmgRpEjSdc KpICxhXe9zOQD24yu3TL9ftORGupHEC67Cl7ZSFnlp6T
X-Google-Smtp-Source: APiQypJaroYbQlGUJ9RpEq9JLRB2t5Q4BGfLs1qH4CAGAD5zWktTnWK9dAtB1HqdZWd8Ba8wJcelqgG0iZfxtBEHMpU=
X-Received: by 2002:a2e:85c4:: with SMTP id h4mr22142042ljj.112.1588183081840; Wed, 29 Apr 2020 10:58:01 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <158575376802.30598.14992202513752114049@ietfa.amsl.com> <53440b6005987fe7b3608186a48428d626d92422.camel@ericsson.com> <890062AB-4F69-490E-95DF-E13841442489@eggert.org>
In-Reply-To: <890062AB-4F69-490E-95DF-E13841442489@eggert.org>
From: Spencer Dawkins at IETF <spencerdawkins.ietf@gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 29 Apr 2020 12:57:35 -0500
Message-ID: <CAKKJt-f3wmPZxcEvdtM1p1z29qnb5oh8pjrQW8DvOvW3bNu-QQ@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: Proposed response to Liaison Statement "LS on need for Multi-Path QUIC for ATSSS"
To: Lars Eggert <lars@eggert.org>
Cc: "quic@ietf.org" <quic@ietf.org>, Magnus Westerlund <magnus.westerlund=40ericsson.com@dmarc.ietf.org>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="0000000000006e76b005a471b098"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/quic/zex55HdT5nsT9SxoPpRvu5T2APM>
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: Wed, 29 Apr 2020 17:58:33 -0000

Hi, Lars, et. al.

On Wed, Apr 29, 2020 at 9:29 AM Lars Eggert <lars@eggert.org> wrote:

> QUIC WG participants,
>
> the chairs have discussed a response to this statement and plan on sending
> the message below. If you have comments, please respond to this e-mail by
> May 13.
>
> Thanks,
> Lars
>
> ---
>
> Thank you for your input to our specifications.
>
> Multipath capabilities for QUIC are currently under active discussion in
> the
> IETF's QUIC WG. Several individual proposals have been made, but the group
> is
> also considering whether the already-specified connection migration
> capabilities
> are sufficient to cover the majority of use cases.
>
> We encourage 3GPP to detail their requirements for QUIC multipath
> capabilities
> in an Internet-Draft, especially if the already-specified connection
> migration
> capabilities are deemed insufficient. 3GPP's active involvement in any
> multipath
> QUIC standardization would be the best way to remain informed of the
> progress of
> any such work in the IETF.
>

This seems very reasonable.

I have one stylistic comment, which is that I believe asking "3GPP to
detail their requirements" is begging for a long-RTT conversation in the
form of continued liaisons from quarterly SA plenaries (next SA plenary
ends July 3, then mid-September, then December). Perhaps asking "We
encourage 3GPP participants to provide an Internet-Draft that will help us
understand the considerations you'd like us to keep in mind, especially if
the already-specified connection migration capabilities are deemed
insufficient".

Gonzalo Camarillo and Lionel Morand can correct me, of course, but I
believe that SA participants can respond more more quickly if they don't
have to bounce between 3GPP SA1 ("requirements") and SA2 ("architecture")
in order to answer a question or express an opinion to the IETF.

Best,

Spencer


> Kind regards,
> Mark Nottingham, Lucas Pardue and Lars Eggert, QUIC Working Group chairs
>

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email