IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [tcpm] draft-ietf-tcpm-urgent-data-06

"Eddy, Wesley M. (GRC-MS00)[ASRC AEROSPACE CORP]" <wesley.m.eddy@nasa.gov> Tue, 12 October 2010 00:28 UTC

Return-Path: <wesley.m.eddy@nasa.gov>
X-Original-To: tcpm@core3.amsl.com
Delivered-To: tcpm@core3.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 461F33A6BA2 for <tcpm@core3.amsl.com>; Mon, 11 Oct 2010 17:28:28 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -106.355
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-106.355 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.244, BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id H73GLyEyn2qH for <tcpm@core3.amsl.com>; Mon, 11 Oct 2010 17:28:27 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ndjsnpf02.ndc.nasa.gov (ndjsnpf02.ndc.nasa.gov [198.117.1.122]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 40C293A6863 for <tcpm@ietf.org>; Mon, 11 Oct 2010 17:28:27 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ndjsppt04.ndc.nasa.gov (ndjsppt04.ndc.nasa.gov [198.117.1.103]) by ndjsnpf02.ndc.nasa.gov (Postfix) with ESMTP id 05DDCA80F4; Mon, 11 Oct 2010 19:29:40 -0500 (CDT)
Received: from ndjshub04.ndc.nasa.gov (ndjshub04-pub.ndc.nasa.gov [198.117.1.34]) by ndjsppt04.ndc.nasa.gov (8.14.3/8.14.3) with ESMTP id o9C0TdI0031627; Mon, 11 Oct 2010 19:29:39 -0500
Received: from NDJSSCC01.ndc.nasa.gov ([198.117.4.166]) by ndjshub04.ndc.nasa.gov ([10.202.202.163]) with mapi; Mon, 11 Oct 2010 19:29:39 -0500
From: "Eddy, Wesley M. (GRC-MS00)[ASRC AEROSPACE CORP]" <wesley.m.eddy@nasa.gov>
To: Lars Eggert <lars.eggert@nokia.com>, Fernando Gont <fernando@gont.com.ar>
Date: Mon, 11 Oct 2010 19:24:40 -0500
Thread-Topic: [tcpm] draft-ietf-tcpm-urgent-data-06
Thread-Index: ActpXDetW+xP7l0VTtitqeU4gid0CgAR6RgX
Message-ID: <C304DB494AC0C04C87C6A6E2FF5603DB481FB1C732@NDJSSCC01.ndc.nasa.gov>
References: <201009301549.RAA14282@TR-Sys.de> <13205C286662DE4387D9AF3AC30EF456B01839E20B@EMBX01-WF.jnpr.net> <31679F6B-0ACA-421F-8131-DA05B764A4A9@nokia.com> <13205C286662DE4387D9AF3AC30EF456B0201C2D1C@EMBX01-WF.jnpr.net> <FCF0200B-A1AF-4902-A110-D7EC08C39FEC@nokia.com> <4CB31ECF.6040307@gont.com.ar>, <1D4E3C6E-B0BF-4CAC-A01E-EC9CDAC14EE0@nokia.com>
In-Reply-To: <1D4E3C6E-B0BF-4CAC-A01E-EC9CDAC14EE0@nokia.com>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
acceptlanguage: en-US
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Proofpoint-Virus-Version: vendor=fsecure engine=2.50.10432:5.2.15, 1.0.148, 0.0.0000 definitions=2010-10-11_13:2010-10-11, 2010-10-11, 1970-01-01 signatures=0
Cc: "draft-ietf-tcpm-urgent-data.all@tools.ietf.org" <draft-ietf-tcpm-urgent-data.all@tools.ietf.org>, "tcpm@ietf.org Extensions" <tcpm@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [tcpm] draft-ietf-tcpm-urgent-data-06
X-BeenThere: tcpm@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
List-Id: TCP Maintenance and Minor Extensions Working Group <tcpm.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tcpm>, <mailto:tcpm-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/tcpm>
List-Post: <mailto:tcpm@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:tcpm-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tcpm>, <mailto:tcpm-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 12 Oct 2010 00:28:28 -0000

For what it's worth, I also agree with the position that David presented.  I don't think it's necessarily worth spending a lot of time and energy to debate, though.

________________________________________
From: tcpm-bounces@ietf.org [tcpm-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Lars Eggert [lars.eggert@nokia.com]
Sent: Monday, October 11, 2010 11:51 AM
To: Fernando Gont
Cc: draft-ietf-tcpm-urgent-data.all@tools.ietf.org; tcpm@ietf.org Extensions
Subject: Re: [tcpm] draft-ietf-tcpm-urgent-data-06

...

> (FWIW, me, I agree with David's position... but for obvious reasons I
> might be biased... hence my request for advice on how to proceed).

I'm mostly agreeing with David as well, but a significant fraction of the IESG does not.

Lars

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email