Re: [Spud] Bare-minimum PLUS (was Re: Thoughts on the privacy concerns expressed at the BoF)

Eliot Lear <lear@cisco.com> Fri, 29 July 2016 13:27 UTC

Return-Path: <lear@cisco.com>
X-Original-To: spud@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: spud@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id DF97012D0BF for <spud@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 29 Jul 2016 06:27:16 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -15.808
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-15.808 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_HI=-5, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H4=-0.01, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=-0.01, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-1.287, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, USER_IN_DEF_DKIM_WL=-7.5] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=cisco.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 x_XzrInHPqS7 for <spud@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 29 Jul 2016 06:27:15 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from aer-iport-1.cisco.com (aer-iport-1.cisco.com [173.38.203.51]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher DHE-RSA-SEED-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id DF89612D63F for <spud@ietf.org>; Fri, 29 Jul 2016 06:27:12 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=cisco.com; i=@cisco.com; l=6856; q=dns/txt; s=iport; t=1469798833; x=1471008433; h=subject:to:references:cc:from:message-id:date: mime-version:in-reply-to; bh=mRFreQbQ3GfRqC5wiCB+jR6+vd+Cl33dUo24d/2ZPVE=; b=Nu6d5AD28Ou8/anY1Jk9Q5GgLR+Ev0sqWadbzRqeLCkUlrEi9DVMui0j /PhlCQKrHmIZZwEDIuO9pRXg0gxkuzh9iorh16gbnjohMB4G6ZkHO12Eg Li1zfEsw/7S2qKw/kNOBRRMDzmI4BU7gZt1zOxhc4mFm3QQ7rqvR0uwGp k=;
X-Files: signature.asc : 481
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: =?us-ascii?q?A0D1CwCJWJtX/xbLJq1dhEVStAKCdoQMh?= =?us-ascii?q?h0CgWcRAQEBAQEBAV0nhF0BBSNWEAsECgonAwICRhEGDQYCAQGILa5QjW8BAQE?= =?us-ascii?q?BAQEBAQEBAQEBAQEBAQEBAQEODogiglWHQYJaAQSZM4M6gXCJVIlUhWyMMYN4N?= =?us-ascii?q?CCCRYE3OjKHawEBAQ?=
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.28,439,1464652800"; d="asc'?scan'208,217";a="679702316"
Received: from aer-iport-nat.cisco.com (HELO aer-core-1.cisco.com) ([173.38.203.22]) by aer-iport-1.cisco.com with ESMTP/TLS/DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 29 Jul 2016 13:27:10 +0000
Received: from [10.61.231.99] ([10.61.231.99]) by aer-core-1.cisco.com (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id u6TDRA17019494; Fri, 29 Jul 2016 13:27:10 GMT
To: Kyle Rose <krose@krose.org>
References: <CAKC-DJjVF_mQb49BJmHNpt-VkJSX6JHXH8hTbYMm2bEYg3rgwA@mail.gmail.com> <CALx6S3636tzxpqjr5b+31sU5vg+8UyekhhR=R-3SUYeQhYvjug@mail.gmail.com> <E8355113905631478EFF04F5AA706E98310462EA@wtl-exchp-2.sandvine.com> <CALx6S36jXoWZxrbictFD2z3=x8XTU6OAGLw-CJjkxrMwpaouYQ@mail.gmail.com> <073728f6-f532-297f-0289-f6e9142bec62@cisco.com> <CAJU8_nV7jeFmv+4UK8X1KyTL9Xo7bWi3he6vUZnr=Jx-_XFV-g@mail.gmail.com> <c22a9729-12c9-a4ee-a0f8-eb7548b3d553@cisco.com> <CAJU8_nXEsw-fLMBH=efsrKyyLw1Mja-niFOgp_1XT=Ne6MB_UA@mail.gmail.com>
From: Eliot Lear <lear@cisco.com>
Message-ID: <c7f6bbe4-2a51-6d9c-4c85-3befbcb7cd8b@cisco.com>
Date: Fri, 29 Jul 2016 15:27:09 +0200
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.11; rv:45.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/45.2.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <CAJU8_nXEsw-fLMBH=efsrKyyLw1Mja-niFOgp_1XT=Ne6MB_UA@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha256; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="gHuXXq2Iw3okfS2gwCEqwRpw6tPLpBhSu"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/spud/m0IewulP4BsYZW8kivaH9PqL6iQ>
Cc: Tom Herbert <tom@herbertland.com>, spud <spud@ietf.org>, =?UTF-8?Q?Mirja_K=c3=bchlewind?= <mirja.kuehlewind@tik.ee.ethz.ch>, Dave Dolson <ddolson@sandvine.com>, Erik Nygren <erik+ietf@nygren.org>
Subject: Re: [Spud] Bare-minimum PLUS (was Re: Thoughts on the privacy concerns expressed at the BoF)
X-BeenThere: spud@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17
Precedence: list
List-Id: Session Protocol Underneath Datagrams <spud.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/spud>, <mailto:spud-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/spud/>
List-Post: <mailto:spud@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:spud-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/spud>, <mailto:spud-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 29 Jul 2016 13:27:17 -0000


On 7/29/16 3:08 PM, Kyle Rose wrote:
> On Fri, Jul 29, 2016 at 9:01 AM, Eliot Lear <lear@cisco.com
> <mailto:lear@cisco.com>> wrote:
>
>     Kyle,
>
>     On 7/29/16 2:39 PM, Kyle Rose wrote:
>>
>>     No one is going to break the sockets API anytime soon, but having
>>     to develop a new API for modern protocols would be a nice problem
>>     to have. First, though, we need to figure out how to route those
>>     protocols through the boxes that right now assume the entire
>>     internet runs over a snapshot of TCP from 20 years ago.
>>
>
>     We now have platforms that lose backward compatibility in as
>     little as a year.  And so if a transport interface is being rev'd,
>     a developer may be left to only guess at which point it will be
>     stable.  In as much as the semantics are changing, that's a problem.
>
>
> Are you referring to QUIC?

No.  I am not.  I am reflecting on how people may really have overlooked
the value of ossification at the waist.  But there is such a thing as
overdoing it, and were I a transport developer I'd want things a little
easier to change too.  Yin/yang (no pun intended).

Eliot