Re: [Taps] IETF planning

Gorry Fairhurst <gorry@erg.abdn.ac.uk> Mon, 26 October 2015 09:55 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 DA4431B396B for <taps@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 26 Oct 2015 02:55:37 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -4.211
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.211 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.01] 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 Pg4mOsiy1MSK for <taps@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 26 Oct 2015 02:55:35 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from pegasus.erg.abdn.ac.uk (pegasus.erg.abdn.ac.uk [139.133.204.173]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 50A701B3A59 for <taps@ietf.org>; Mon, 26 Oct 2015 02:55:35 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from gorry-mac.erg.abdn.ac.uk (gorry-mac.erg.abdn.ac.uk [139.133.207.5]) by pegasus.erg.abdn.ac.uk (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id BDC811B001B9; Mon, 26 Oct 2015 10:02:50 +0000 (GMT)
References: <64271754-EED2-4322-BB0E-51CB66365682@gmail.com> <B36B9E5E-0EB5-418A-A6A1-E103C8ECF500@ifi.uio.no> <CCC80AEF-66CD-4497-A374-2ED89DF4FA17@trammell.ch> <CAD62q9XQMSyuG_=HYjXKe12iE=-F3HasXqrmJs+RAQeBZbddCQ@mail.gmail.com>
To: Aaron Falk <aaron.falk@gmail.com>, Stein Gjessing <steing@ifi.uio.no>
From: Gorry Fairhurst <gorry@erg.abdn.ac.uk>
Organization: The University of Aberdeen is a charity registered in Scotland, No SC013683.
Message-ID: <562DF846.7090901@erg.abdn.ac.uk>
Date: Mon, 26 Oct 2015 09:54:14 +0000
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.10; rv:38.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/38.3.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <CAD62q9XQMSyuG_=HYjXKe12iE=-F3HasXqrmJs+RAQeBZbddCQ@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Archived-At: <http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/taps/zMMSc1P21dMQoX_Ydew0L6AU_MA>
Cc: Brian Trammell <ietf@trammell.ch>, Michael Welzl <michawe@ifi.uio.no>, "taps@ietf.org" <taps@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [Taps] IETF planning
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: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/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: Mon, 26 Oct 2015 09:55:38 -0000

On 22/10/2015 15:14, Aaron Falk wrote:
>
>     > draft-welzl-taps-transports currently only covers TCP and SCTP. But then: how many other protocols?
>     > It seems people agree that the protocols covered in draft-welzl-taps-transports should be a subset of the protocols covered in draft-ietf-taps-transports. My question is, then: how to choose the subset?
>     >
>     > It seems obvious to include protocols that are seeing some deployment, i.e. of course UDP, maybe UDP-Lite (?), but also MPTCP…
>     > However: if that is the only decision ground, we probably wouldn’t include DCCP. Are we then making a significant mistake, missing a lesson to be learned?
>     >
>     > That, to me, is a discussion I’d like to have in Yokohama.
>
>     +1, and FWIW that's exactly the same starting point I got to on my own.
>
>
> Any volunteers to kick off the lead the discussion?
>
>

<snip test on another draft>

So, I think UDP, and UDP-Lite *NEED* to be included. MPTCOP also.

On DCCP, this has many services being re-invented above. I think we have 
an interesting dilemma about whether to describe this, I suggest one of 
the reason for the minimal use of DCCP (DCCP/UDP) could well be the lack 
of a framework that allows this to be done without recoding an app. So, 
if we had such a framework *WHEN* DCCP/UDP was done, we may now have 
seen more usage.

>
> --aaron
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Taps mailing list
> Taps@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/taps
>

Gorry