Re: [tcpm] draft-briscoe-tcpm-syn-op-sis-02

[John Leslie <[e-mail]>]

Bob Briscoe <[e-mail]> wrote:
> 
> I've just posted a revision here:
> <http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-briscoe-tcpm-syn-op-sis-02>
> 
> * I've taken more care to explain it. It was a bit terse before. So 
> it's ready for the list to review properly now.

   I won't claim to have read the whole thing (24 pages); but I think
I've read enough to justify a quick response (and I have a meeting
startig soon).

   Bob, as usual, has a very good idea -- if a bit over-complicated.

   Placing the additional options at the end of the packet has real
promise.

   I recommend that the response (acknowledging the SYN-U option)
include a checksum or hash to verify what additional options have
been received.

   I strongly recommend against trying to integrate this with the
already adopted after-the-initial-SYN draft.

   Much of the complexity is inevitable, alas, but a rewrite to
change the order of presentation and remove any differences in the
data on-the-wire would really help both comprehension and adoption,
IMHO.

   Also, in the interests of attracting adoption, I'd recommend
first presenting the case we hope to finally achieve -- a single
connection opened with the SYN-U -- immediately followed with a
list of problems we may see. Then in sections following, we can
introduce the overlapping-SYNs hack and other work-arounds.

   (IMHO there's nothing wrong with initial experiments which do NOT
use the overlappingSYNs.)

   More tomorrow...

--
John Leslie <[e-mail]>