Re: [tcpm] Proceeding 8312bis draft (Re: 2nd WGLC for draft-ietf-tcpm-rfc8312bis)
Yoshifumi Nishida <nsd.ietf@gmail.com> Wed, 09 March 2022 09:21 UTC
Return-Path: <nsd.ietf@gmail.com>
X-Original-To: tcpm@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: tcpm@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 683C23A194D; Wed, 9 Mar 2022 01:21:01 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.107
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.107 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_SCC_BODY_TEXT_LINE=-0.01, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.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 F_Filrot6reP; Wed, 9 Mar 2022 01:20:57 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail-wr1-x42c.google.com (mail-wr1-x42c.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4864:20::42c]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id B6DF13A194C; Wed, 9 Mar 2022 01:20:56 -0800 (PST)
Received: by mail-wr1-x42c.google.com with SMTP id j26so2015535wrb.1; Wed, 09 Mar 2022 01:20:56 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20210112; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=zoRIxzqVHVFfRGZid6gFBhnC+Qf5tKYcbg6qMkOBknk=; b=mhTTd86irTL9xi3Rb338dPmzkUH/3sueREzybrK9KzVrmdRfiwmih10nB4hs9V6yoW gC83g77PXeUCUV42DAAP7A9zwTc533oicKUkP+05O2bn/SIgKloGQdYNFsZkIgN/YWm8 W6fq5U17C3FcCGRcnKtjCsdbGZko6VicKQMIY3NSYGwznPRQsmu91ZMGCHdqhNBjDif0 vmfHGrYd/PM5xEe+cDtwDCnbWL8jXHUcj5vEuhheWOMMDJJbtz6OTWRDDGWgS/CtUy6/ a2sDqg6Sov1w/likWOd1V2ZRoV/3ZlvaCRvTAeCjvJu3wcI9nF+aIaY+r32UeFxTpoOv kRrA==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20210112; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=zoRIxzqVHVFfRGZid6gFBhnC+Qf5tKYcbg6qMkOBknk=; b=K62wFIaHUC03HZYBLf/DK0WsNMuwhU1wBYCgcKfNH3QuJx4ZAcOd90SCjxj68jBhcr j71ZfV5LoUvI+bfagpyyMM7QFDh3FAVNRW1QAGq3vkaHb8EOZeOOkDbM1VtGusghDxQq P0lFX/UrNdcK2LTJI9eMV0Fk64XkUZbi/DrSaL2Pmzz0uDTp6i+QiyQieZw+cz39BbfN iw51H01ZttOpHZ/7zWp6Aph3la42EjlzbP6inqJz4igzE4mrjyLHSgSneDTVoCG8ZQ7t xdPxl46ngF8Hebup2p6RUSpvjXgfjcivK0RDtAyA9byWFLcqtsAvaq7n5gUoMIAQ/2Qh sEVQ==
X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM531g5n9TfnUKAbV9fiei0A5LwyDL6Y8RCbGV9OXMuQsItwhNiNZD UPQIkaJaoTpj3GFNPR7zkbCVoZ17y+8Nnr9ezm1yElJN9qo=
X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJzSzT90kZMwJApD4itj+vNDx9nyk5bDNPCSewglbwcl684bBkVCzNBHs+X+9s1Ax0I0zHNHrVUegiZUrRu4rEg=
X-Received: by 2002:adf:e8ca:0:b0:1f1:d8be:e20c with SMTP id k10-20020adfe8ca000000b001f1d8bee20cmr15624544wrn.373.1646817654249; Wed, 09 Mar 2022 01:20:54 -0800 (PST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <164318837039.21788.17451980682651967578@ietfa.amsl.com> <EEA435EC-AAAC-4899-8E94-2D54EDE5F72E@eggert.org> <CAAK044S9HQXvfvgM6mBuvOWJPHtCaa6xo6CoP2r8Vq61tKaY5g@mail.gmail.com> <CAAK044Q5Lv175T6RcVp+XKEfqZ=Z_+TfjJ5Q9NzzA6wVerMkSw@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CAAK044Q5Lv175T6RcVp+XKEfqZ=Z_+TfjJ5Q9NzzA6wVerMkSw@mail.gmail.com>
From: Yoshifumi Nishida <nsd.ietf@gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 09 Mar 2022 01:20:43 -0800
Message-ID: <CAAK044Ta-Nb7BRGiK_fxaHxSxTAf1Ajb_QmkmVGqrAm-OCBQ9A@mail.gmail.com>
To: "tcpm@ietf.org Extensions" <tcpm@ietf.org>
Cc: tcpm-chairs <tcpm-chairs@ietf.org>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="0000000000004a9d0f05d9c59d3e"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/tcpm/0bsXC4g20hbRPDOrbUhzuRBMvi0>
Subject: Re: [tcpm] Proceeding 8312bis draft (Re: 2nd WGLC for draft-ietf-tcpm-rfc8312bis)
X-BeenThere: tcpm@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: TCP Maintenance and Minor Extensions Working Group <tcpm.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/tcpm>, <mailto:tcpm-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/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: Wed, 09 Mar 2022 09:21:02 -0000
Hi folks, Thanks for the feedback. I also exchanged opinions with several folks via private e-mails. Based on them, I am thinking we can probably separate the discussions about how to address the concerns that require further evaluations, such as publishing a doc, additional experiments, etc. This may take time, but I believe it won't block the publication of the bis draft. Also, it seems to me that we're converging to publish the bis draft as a PS. I am currently hoping we can make a decision at the next WG meeting. If you have some concerns on it, please send your thoughts to the ML or speak up at the meeting. Thanks, -- Yoshi On Mon, Feb 28, 2022 at 2:06 AM Yoshifumi Nishida <nsd.ietf@gmail.com> wrote: > Hi, > > We've been discussing how to proceed 8312bis draft, but I think we still > haven't settled yet. > In my understanding, there seems to be the following options so far. > if you have some thoughts on them or you have other options for this, > please share. > BTW, please note that this discussion might affect our future drafts > because we want to apply the same bar for all standard docs as much as > possible. > > 1: Publish the draft as a non-standard doc > a: publish as an informational doc > > b: publish as an experimental doc > * we might need to describe what experiments are expected. > > 2: Publish the draft as a PS doc > a: do additional experiments to make sure there's no concern as a PS > doc. > * we will need to decide what kinds of experiments are required, > what would be the expected results before the experiments. > * we need to delay the publication of the doc until the validation > of the experiments has finished > > b: publish an additional doc that describes the checking points on the > doc (and other related docs) for long term analysis. > > Thanks, > -- > Yoshi > > > On Mon, Jan 31, 2022 at 11:43 PM Yoshifumi Nishida <nsd.ietf@gmail.com> > wrote: > >> Hello, >> >> After some discussions among chairs, we decided to run the 2nd WGLC on >> draft-ietf-tcpm-rfc8312bis in consideration of the importance of the draft. >> We'll be grateful if you could send your feedback to the ML. The WGLC >> runs until *Feb 11*. >> >> If interested, you can check in-depth past discussions in the following >> URL. >> https://github.com/NTAP/rfc8312bis/ >> >> Thank you so much! >> -- >> tcpm co-chairs >> >> >> On Wed, Jan 26, 2022 at 2:50 AM Lars Eggert <lars@eggert.org> wrote: >> >>> Hi, >>> >>> this -06 version rolls in all the changes requested during (and after) >>> WGLC ended. >>> >>> I'll leave it up to the chairs to decide if another WGLC is warranted or >>> the document can progress as-is. >>> >>> Thanks, >>> Lars >>> >>> >>> > On 2022-1-26, at 11:12, internet-drafts@ietf.org wrote: >>> > >>> > >>> > A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts >>> directories. >>> > This draft is a work item of the TCP Maintenance and Minor Extensions >>> WG of the IETF. >>> > >>> > Title : CUBIC for Fast and Long-Distance Networks >>> > Authors : Lisong Xu >>> > Sangtae Ha >>> > Injong Rhee >>> > Vidhi Goel >>> > Lars Eggert >>> > Filename : draft-ietf-tcpm-rfc8312bis-06.txt >>> > Pages : 35 >>> > Date : 2022-01-26 >>> > >>> > Abstract: >>> > CUBIC is a standard TCP congestion control algorithm that uses a >>> > cubic function instead of a linear congestion window increase >>> > function to improve scalability and stability over fast and long- >>> > distance networks. CUBIC has been adopted as the default TCP >>> > congestion control algorithm by the Linux, Windows, and Apple stacks. >>> > >>> > This document updates the specification of CUBIC to include >>> > algorithmic improvements based on these implementations and recent >>> > academic work. Based on the extensive deployment experience with >>> > CUBIC, it also moves the specification to the Standards Track, >>> > obsoleting RFC 8312. This also requires updating RFC 5681, to allow >>> > for CUBIC's occasionally more aggressive sending behavior. >>> > >>> > >>> > The IETF datatracker status page for this draft is: >>> > https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-tcpm-rfc8312bis/ >>> > >>> > There is also an HTML version available at: >>> > https://www.ietf.org/archive/id/draft-ietf-tcpm-rfc8312bis-06.html >>> > >>> > A diff from the previous version is available at: >>> > https://www.ietf.org/rfcdiff?url2=draft-ietf-tcpm-rfc8312bis-06 >>> > >>> > >>> > Internet-Drafts are also available by rsync at rsync.ietf.org: >>> :internet-drafts >>> > >>> > >>> > _______________________________________________ >>> > tcpm mailing list >>> > tcpm@ietf.org >>> > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tcpm >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> tcpm mailing list >>> tcpm@ietf.org >>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tcpm >>> >>
- [tcpm] I-D Action: draft-ietf-tcpm-rfc8312bis-06.… internet-drafts
- Re: [tcpm] I-D Action: draft-ietf-tcpm-rfc8312bis… Lars Eggert
- Re: [tcpm] I-D Action: draft-ietf-tcpm-rfc8312bis… Yoshifumi Nishida
- Re: [tcpm] I-D Action: draft-ietf-tcpm-rfc8312bis… Vidhi Goel
- [tcpm] 2nd WGLC for draft-ietf-tcpm-rfc8312bis Yoshifumi Nishida
- Re: [tcpm] 2nd WGLC for draft-ietf-tcpm-rfc8312bis Yoshifumi Nishida
- Re: [tcpm] I-D Action: draft-ietf-tcpm-rfc8312bis… Yoshifumi Nishida
- Re: [tcpm] 2nd WGLC for draft-ietf-tcpm-rfc8312bis Vidhi Goel
- Re: [tcpm] 2nd WGLC for draft-ietf-tcpm-rfc8312bis Yoshifumi Nishida
- Re: [tcpm] 2nd WGLC for draft-ietf-tcpm-rfc8312bis Markku Kojo
- Re: [tcpm] 2nd WGLC for draft-ietf-tcpm-rfc8312bis Yoshifumi Nishida
- Re: [tcpm] 2nd WGLC for draft-ietf-tcpm-rfc8312bis Yuchung Cheng
- Re: [tcpm] 2nd WGLC for draft-ietf-tcpm-rfc8312bis Markku Kojo
- Re: [tcpm] 2nd WGLC for draft-ietf-tcpm-rfc8312bis Neal Cardwell
- Re: [tcpm] 2nd WGLC for draft-ietf-tcpm-rfc8312bis Vidhi Goel
- Re: [tcpm] 2nd WGLC for draft-ietf-tcpm-rfc8312bis Yoshifumi Nishida
- Re: [tcpm] 2nd WGLC for draft-ietf-tcpm-rfc8312bis Markku Kojo
- Re: [tcpm] 2nd WGLC for draft-ietf-tcpm-rfc8312bis Markku Kojo
- Re: [tcpm] 2nd WGLC for draft-ietf-tcpm-rfc8312bis Vidhi Goel
- Re: [tcpm] 2nd WGLC for draft-ietf-tcpm-rfc8312bis Neal Cardwell
- Re: [tcpm] 2nd WGLC for draft-ietf-tcpm-rfc8312bis Yoshifumi Nishida
- Re: [tcpm] 2nd WGLC for draft-ietf-tcpm-rfc8312bis Lars Eggert
- Re: [tcpm] 2nd WGLC for draft-ietf-tcpm-rfc8312bis Bob Briscoe
- Re: [tcpm] 2nd WGLC for draft-ietf-tcpm-rfc8312bis Scharf, Michael
- Re: [tcpm] 2nd WGLC for draft-ietf-tcpm-rfc8312bis Bob Briscoe
- Re: [tcpm] 2nd WGLC for draft-ietf-tcpm-rfc8312bis Yoshifumi Nishida
- Re: [tcpm] 2nd WGLC for draft-ietf-tcpm-rfc8312bis touch@strayalpha.com
- Re: [tcpm] 2nd WGLC for draft-ietf-tcpm-rfc8312bis Bob Briscoe
- Re: [tcpm] 2nd WGLC for draft-ietf-tcpm-rfc8312bis Lars Eggert
- Re: [tcpm] 2nd WGLC for draft-ietf-tcpm-rfc8312bis Lars Eggert
- [tcpm] Proceeding 8312bis draft (Re: 2nd WGLC for… Yoshifumi Nishida
- Re: [tcpm] Proceeding 8312bis draft (Re: 2nd WGLC… Neal Cardwell
- Re: [tcpm] Proceeding 8312bis draft (Re: 2nd WGLC… Vidhi Goel
- Re: [tcpm] Proceeding 8312bis draft (Re: 2nd WGLC… Yuchung Cheng
- Re: [tcpm] Proceeding 8312bis draft (Re: 2nd WGLC… Mirja Kuehlewind
- Re: [tcpm] Proceeding 8312bis draft (Re: 2nd WGLC… Martin Duke
- Re: [tcpm] Proceeding 8312bis draft (Re: 2nd WGLC… Gorry Fairhurst
- Re: [tcpm] Proceeding 8312bis draft (Re: 2nd WGLC… Yoshifumi Nishida
- Re: [tcpm] 2nd WGLC for draft-ietf-tcpm-rfc8312bis Markku Kojo
- Re: [tcpm] 2nd WGLC for draft-ietf-tcpm-rfc8312bis Markku Kojo
- Re: [tcpm] 2nd WGLC for draft-ietf-tcpm-rfc8312bis Markku Kojo
- Re: [tcpm] 2nd WGLC for draft-ietf-tcpm-rfc8312bis Markku Kojo