Re: [Taps] First draft of an article for the IETF journal

Gorry Fairhurst <gorry@erg.abdn.ac.uk> Wed, 21 May 2014 13:50 UTC

Return-Path: <gorry@erg.abdn.ac.uk>
X-Original-To: taps@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: taps@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id DB7FF1A06AA for <taps@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 21 May 2014 06:50:20 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -4.852
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.852 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.651, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham
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 Uy6ajMrmuXDp for <taps@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 21 May 2014 06:50:17 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from spey.erg.abdn.ac.uk (spey.erg.abdn.ac.uk [139.133.204.173]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D66321A069D for <taps@ietf.org>; Wed, 21 May 2014 06:50:16 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by spey.erg.abdn.ac.uk (Postfix, from userid 5001) id 91E932B454E; Wed, 21 May 2014 14:50:15 +0100 (BST)
Received: from gorry-mac.erg.abdn.ac.uk (gorry-mac.erg.abdn.ac.uk [139.133.207.5]) by spey.erg.abdn.ac.uk (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 3A4D12B4044; Wed, 21 May 2014 14:50:13 +0100 (BST)
Message-ID: <537CAF15.1090301@erg.abdn.ac.uk>
Date: Wed, 21 May 2014 14:50:13 +0100
From: Gorry Fairhurst <gorry@erg.abdn.ac.uk>
Organization: The University of Aberdeen is a charity registered in Scotland, No SC013683.
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.6; rv:24.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/24.5.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: David Ros <dros@simula.no>, Aaron Falk <falk-ietf@dgftech.com>
References: <CALiXHoy4YibDSQEhK+u5hQiRORJc8YcmZag3BngWsTajbbm+Yw@mail.gmail.com> <800BC3A3-682D-4C15-A65D-660BA821E0DD@simula.no>
In-Reply-To: <800BC3A3-682D-4C15-A65D-660BA821E0DD@simula.no>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1"; format="flowed"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/taps/6Kisv9DjMlDm9tEozljkW8GqSeE
Cc: Michael Welzl <michawe@ifi.uio.no>, taps@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [Taps] First draft of an article for the IETF journal
X-BeenThere: taps@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
Reply-To: gorry@erg.abdn.ac.uk
List-Id: Discussions on Transport Services <taps.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/taps>, <mailto:taps-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/taps/>
List-Post: <mailto:taps@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:taps-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/taps>, <mailto:taps-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 21 May 2014 13:50:21 -0000

Happy eyeballs...

The non-reference:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Happy_Eyeballs

http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc6555

Dan Wing and Andrew Yourtchenko. "Happy Eyeballs: Improving User 
Experiences with IPv6 and SCTP". Internet Protocol Journal, vol.13 n.3.

Gorry

On 21/05/2014 14:45, David Ros wrote:
>
> On 21 May 2014, at 15:41, Aaron Falk <falk-ietf@dgftech.com> wrote:
>
>> On Wed, May 21, 2014 at 5:11 AM, Michael Welzl <michawe@ifi.uio.no> wrote:
>>
>> My opinion: at first, we should focus on things that can be installed one-sided, on the sender side only. Yes it's limited, but a number of things are possible there. E.g., pluggable congestion controls in TCP have always worked without involving the receiver - but right now, pluggable congestion control isn't an IETF matter. Happy Eyeballs can be done without coordinating with a receiver, at least for the case that we're using well-known ports and the receiver listens on more than one protocol.
>>
>> I've forgotten the details of 'Happy Eyeballs'.  Can you provide a cite?
>>
>
> Hi,
>
> http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-wing-tsvwg-happy-eyeballs-sctp-02
>
> Cheers,
>
> David
>
>
>>
>> But yes, quite quickly one runs into limitations there; anyway, for divide-and-conquer  :-)   reasons, I think we want to go with a sender-side-only-installation assumption for now.
>>
>> Seems worth exploring the implications of such an approach where you have the same app sitting on top of very different APIs (e.g., Berkeley socket vs TAPS) at either end of the connection.  That combined with an app where either endpoint might be a sender.
>>
>>
>> Though, I'm not sure if we have had enough discussions on this and if absolutely everyone is on the same page (though, indirectly perhaps, as our draft charter states that signaling is out of scope, and signaling would be needed to align both ends).
>>
>> yup
>>
>> cheers,
>>
>> --aaron
>> _______________________________________________
>> Taps mailing list
>> Taps@ietf.org
>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/taps
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Taps mailing list
> Taps@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/taps
>