Re: [tcpm] I-D Action: draft-ietf-tcpm-rfc793bis-16.txt
Wesley Eddy <wes@mti-systems.com> Tue, 24 March 2020 14:09 UTC
Return-Path: <wes@mti-systems.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 2CC9A3A0B46 for <tcpm@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 24 Mar 2020 07:09:14 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.898
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.898 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=mti-systems-com.20150623.gappssmtp.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 fC9J0S01gal0 for <tcpm@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 24 Mar 2020 07:09:12 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-qt1-x829.google.com (mail-qt1-x829.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::829]) (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 024533A0A03 for <tcpm@ietf.org>; Tue, 24 Mar 2020 07:09:11 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-qt1-x829.google.com with SMTP id d12so12542248qtj.4 for <tcpm@ietf.org>; Tue, 24 Mar 2020 07:09:11 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=mti-systems-com.20150623.gappssmtp.com; s=20150623; h=subject:to:references:from:message-id:date:user-agent:mime-version :in-reply-to:content-language; bh=V78uBykkYln67a9xv6jhn8eov6rLEvWUPWCtAGOsUgY=; b=TkgWzcVdyOASVYfk4IWlHmqxYo6rdf8dVNqtoCWJZmPeR+JBKA3ursAsX7nlox9aZL 9Ck/fofKJAB533/A3Xq5BCzsQ5sdSNA4N3wfyvaqPgXUEm4joezfp6qeDt1MeIF5EYra uNdVj1LLGR2uy7HvRmcMDXGOx7dNNGroY5Gj7pIOOTqkD5lBx6mjO5SzJ2ihdG/6xBLO ibpUCV7TtMPg9eP7a61Y7aAPcR0l17R0/nBDAfsh/Tov3odL+/toejeG2rGm8TjBaqAE rMJMRYajEMzSuduP8W/dn4eV+B/lFdkLgw0z444FCpJbqmxW4eZutoZ8ozd3hbk0nCkV OQpA==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:subject:to:references:from:message-id:date :user-agent:mime-version:in-reply-to:content-language; bh=V78uBykkYln67a9xv6jhn8eov6rLEvWUPWCtAGOsUgY=; b=E1nerYI4yuhCyzkuFjLy5n7yKTI5csaDSfsSZh9kFBeUJRImH7QHg2kzfNIz4sYzPa CBvgiN1Dg9nZtwp+d/sK56WmKoVxZeuOqG3wqOXz/W0NhjGzYB57zg9Qk6gXpAQ6lTCW Hrlsr33io0uOVIFyZCkwnDtkosImCZaSO79ZASwG1MjBdhAOB5BjE3Ey8WLgZ4dASFb4 Z71Pyrgi64wkZH8r2dFHiIyyLyCSPfzzEV9ZJdIqaFTI6JnVcR9TzCBTRa+sAfC+juW0 /DL3SbeEBh6g3zNRrtZVagHRlB6s70gUf3C/ZOBZQuHDhp7+gFFQYV5ZK59QPlvPpQVl D9XQ==
X-Gm-Message-State: ANhLgQ2d8KwriuHlbCawuQWQfr3RBW3/DHEGbNF4vIaesZ3Mfs8ha9tt AeKgCIHCPdIYjJ2asIRjhn2zFzhI4D4L/A==
X-Google-Smtp-Source: ADFU+vtEwg2qrOULjRAPddAZMK7WQAPWL68hYDSEjXmD9Hi1JDJ5Df7ryMRkcBU6L9wN8rKVXD0XQg==
X-Received: by 2002:ac8:4784:: with SMTP id k4mr22158333qtq.78.1585058950490; Tue, 24 Mar 2020 07:09:10 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [192.168.1.8] (user-12l31c7.cable.mindspring.com. [69.81.133.135]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id u4sm13204811qka.35.2020.03.24.07.09.09 for <tcpm@ietf.org> (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 bits=128/128); Tue, 24 Mar 2020 07:09:09 -0700 (PDT)
To: tcpm@ietf.org
References: <158505800923.11744.10324863157807137499@ietfa.amsl.com>
From: Wesley Eddy <wes@mti-systems.com>
Message-ID: <58154b27-7a38-1ec3-9ab3-8a1acd25f952@mti-systems.com>
Date: Tue, 24 Mar 2020 10:09:06 -0400
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; WOW64; rv:68.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/68.6.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <158505800923.11744.10324863157807137499@ietfa.amsl.com>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="------------DFDA1A31D3305269258F0E2B"
Content-Language: en-US
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/tcpm/8N_Y_VhKWnVYyMka-VirJ6EUwXs>
Subject: Re: [tcpm] I-D Action: draft-ietf-tcpm-rfc793bis-16.txt
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: Tue, 24 Mar 2020 14:09:20 -0000
In this update, I think everything is addressed except for 4 topics: 1) Reserved bits description - I made no changes yet. Discussion spanned a few threads, but didn't look to me like it converged. Michael's summary thread covers a number of options and relevant questions: https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/tcpm/UOHo4tXQPpBV90U-pRmdt_LfjRA/ 2) R1 and R2 values - Gorry questioned whether (A) applications should still be notified with R1 is reached, and (B) whether R1 = 3 RTOs and R2 >= 100s are still recommended values. I don't think any other RFC or errata has revised these, so am inclined to leave it alone for now in this doc, but maybe bookmark it as a topic for future consideration in the working group. 3) Dead gateway detection - I made no changes yet; this may be another topic for potential future consideration. The question is posed here: https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/tcpm/IGhHYUOCwES7I-DjsgHnFsa-zVY/ 4) OPEN+LISTEN while same local port is in SYN-SENT/RECEIVED - I made no changes yet, but Gorry suggested that the text below may need updating with regard to modern systems (I'll be grateful for specific suggested changes on this): A TCP that supports multiple concurrent users MUST provide an OPEN call that will functionally allow an application to LISTEN on a port while a connection block with the same local port is in SYN-SENT or SYN-RECEIVED state (MUST-42). On 3/24/2020 9:53 AM, 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 : Transmission Control Protocol Specification > Author : Wesley M. Eddy > Filename : draft-ietf-tcpm-rfc793bis-16.txt > Pages : 106 > Date : 2020-03-24 > > Abstract: > This document specifies the Internet's Transmission Control Protocol > (TCP). TCP is an important transport layer protocol in the Internet > stack, and has continuously evolved over decades of use and growth of > the Internet. Over this time, a number of changes have been made to > TCP as it was specified in RFC 793, though these have only been > documented in a piecemeal fashion. This document collects and brings > those changes together with the protocol specification from RFC 793. > This document obsoletes RFC 793, as well as 879, 2873, 6093, 6429, > 6528, and 6691 that updated parts of RFC 793. It updates RFC 1122, > and should be considered as a replacement for the portions of that > document dealing with TCP requirements. It updates RFC 5961 due to a > small clarification in reset handling while in the SYN-RECEIVED > state. > > RFC EDITOR NOTE: If approved for publication as an RFC, this should > be marked additionally as "STD: 7" and replace RFC 793 in that role. > > > > The IETF datatracker status page for this draft is: > https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-tcpm-rfc793bis/ > > There are also htmlized versions available at: > https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-tcpm-rfc793bis-16 > https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-ietf-tcpm-rfc793bis-16 > > A diff from the previous version is available at: > https://www.ietf.org/rfcdiff?url2=draft-ietf-tcpm-rfc793bis-16 > > > Please note that it may take a couple of minutes from the time of submission > until the htmlized version and diff are available at tools.ietf.org. > > Internet-Drafts are also available by anonymous FTP at: > ftp://ftp.ietf.org/internet-drafts/ > > > _______________________________________________ > tcpm mailing list > tcpm@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tcpm
- [tcpm] I-D Action: draft-ietf-tcpm-rfc793bis-16.t… internet-drafts
- Re: [tcpm] I-D Action: draft-ietf-tcpm-rfc793bis-… Wesley Eddy
- Re: [tcpm] I-D Action: draft-ietf-tcpm-rfc793bis-… Joseph Touch
- Re: [tcpm] I-D Action: draft-ietf-tcpm-rfc793bis-… Scharf, Michael
- Re: [tcpm] I-D Action: draft-ietf-tcpm-rfc793bis-… Joseph Touch
- Re: [tcpm] I-D Action: draft-ietf-tcpm-rfc793bis-… Scharf, Michael
- Re: [tcpm] I-D Action: draft-ietf-tcpm-rfc793bis-… Joseph Touch
- Re: [tcpm] I-D Action: draft-ietf-tcpm-rfc793bis-… Scharf, Michael