Re: [Spud] [ALU] Re: States in draft-trammell-plus-statefulness-00

"Fossati, Thomas (Nokia - GB)" <thomas.fossati@nokia.com> Mon, 14 November 2016 18:18 UTC

Return-Path: <thomas.fossati@nokia.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 BAAC41294A0 for <spud@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 14 Nov 2016 10:18:45 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -6.902
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.902 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H2=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
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 kVDMOHqz4cKC for <spud@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 14 Nov 2016 10:18:44 -0800 (PST)
Received: from smtp-fr.alcatel-lucent.com (fr-hpida-esg-02.alcatel-lucent.com [135.245.210.21]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 34A78129409 for <spud@ietf.org>; Mon, 14 Nov 2016 10:18:44 -0800 (PST)
Received: from fr712umx4.dmz.alcatel-lucent.com (unknown [135.245.210.45]) by Websense Email Security Gateway with ESMTPS id 28F4CB49391A5; Mon, 14 Nov 2016 18:18:39 +0000 (GMT)
Received: from fr712usmtp2.zeu.alcatel-lucent.com (fr712usmtp2.zeu.alcatel-lucent.com [135.239.2.42]) by fr712umx4.dmz.alcatel-lucent.com (GMO-o) with ESMTP id uAEIIf9K001838 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=OK); Mon, 14 Nov 2016 18:18:41 GMT
Received: from FR712WXCHHUB03.zeu.alcatel-lucent.com (fr712wxchhub03.zeu.alcatel-lucent.com [135.239.2.74]) by fr712usmtp2.zeu.alcatel-lucent.com (GMO) with ESMTP id uAEIHVsR007011 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=FAIL); Mon, 14 Nov 2016 19:18:40 +0100
Received: from FR711WXCHMBA08.zeu.alcatel-lucent.com ([169.254.4.241]) by FR712WXCHHUB03.zeu.alcatel-lucent.com ([135.239.2.74]) with mapi id 14.03.0301.000; Mon, 14 Nov 2016 19:18:15 +0100
From: "Fossati, Thomas (Nokia - GB)" <thomas.fossati@nokia.com>
To: Christian Huitema <huitema@huitema.net>, "'Brian Trammell'" <ietf@trammell.ch>, "'Dave Dolson'" <ddolson@sandvine.com>
Thread-Topic: [ALU] Re: [Spud] States in draft-trammell-plus-statefulness-00
Thread-Index: AdI7o1fE+iaNGCadS5OC9ubAYOjCyQCbnsUAACBRkoAAAf2fgA==
Date: Mon, 14 Nov 2016 18:18:14 +0000
Message-ID: <D44FAB88.75D94%thomas.fossati@alcatel-lucent.com>
References: <E8355113905631478EFF04F5AA706E9831159645@wtl-exchp-2.sandvine.com> <835E355C-0AF1-4660-B0FF-8BEE0C54788D@trammell.ch> <03b101d23e9b$7c883540$75989fc0$@huitema.net>
In-Reply-To: <03b101d23e9b$7c883540$75989fc0$@huitema.net>
Accept-Language: en-GB, en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
user-agent: Microsoft-MacOutlook/14.6.9.160926
x-originating-ip: [135.239.27.38]
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-ID: <4FE35DF94867FF44BBF58FA7C0DF5625@exchange.lucent.com>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
MIME-Version: 1.0
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/spud/xY3VrbjxSTzfDJDk7tgv7CYAjGU>
Cc: "hildjj@cursive.net" <hildjj@cursive.net>, "mirja.kuehlewind@tik.ee.ethz.ch" <mirja.kuehlewind@tik.ee.ethz.ch>, "spud@ietf.org" <spud@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [Spud] [ALU] Re: States in draft-trammell-plus-statefulness-00
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: Mon, 14 Nov 2016 18:18:46 -0000

On 14/11/2016 17:21, "Spud on behalf of Christian Huitema"
<spud-bounces@ietf.org on behalf of huitema@huitema.net>; wrote:
>The natural temptation is to go analyze the end-to-end protocol, but it
>can lead to complex code and ossification. I really wonder whether PLUS
>should do specific work for QUIC, by opposition to "generic work
>applicable to any UDP based protocol."  I am concerned that implementing
>protocol-specific logic in the middle of the network leads to
>ossification of that protocol,

Premise: I agree that PLUS should be properly separated from QUIC.

I am concerned that making QUIC (standard) depend on PLUS (experimental)
for this pretty essential function can be tricky.

How do you think this should be handled?