IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [tcpm] AccECN: summary text about omitting unchanged fields

"Scheffenegger, Richard" <rs.ietf@gmx.at> Fri, 29 July 2022 20:32 UTC

Return-Path: <rs.ietf@gmx.at>
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 DCD8CC157B37; Fri, 29 Jul 2022 13:32:49 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -6.911
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.911 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, NICE_REPLY_A=-0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H2=-0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_SCC_BODY_TEXT_LINE=-0.01] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=gmx.net
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([50.223.129.194]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id Pg6mq-ml16KH; Fri, 29 Jul 2022 13:32:49 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mout.gmx.net (mout.gmx.net [212.227.17.22]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange ECDHE (P-256) server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 7375EC157901; Fri, 29 Jul 2022 13:32:48 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=gmx.net; s=badeba3b8450; t=1659126724; bh=UhlQmWYPu7MTCUlhE1mfKLJJekD3qs/kyjYT9cgFsH0=; h=X-UI-Sender-Class:Date:Subject:To:Cc:References:From:In-Reply-To; b=BO4PmoRLV+5uPUYp1w0c2jDIWslq4zObxmMK++cTgyThUmQ6qjm82UOfn1WcjpOaN BqU47nYPeiCZcpp1i2XtiVTltQpcP7novf3v4q3foWXPUi3zGO/F1LNmIuuGUKMYRW Cmi+dk4uR7CV6ezHO/deVFMqdR1blK7VAzr46SwQ=
X-UI-Sender-Class: 01bb95c1-4bf8-414a-932a-4f6e2808ef9c
Received: from [31.133.146.5] ([31.133.146.5]) by mail.gmx.net (mrgmx104 [212.227.17.168]) with ESMTPSA (Nemesis) id 1M5wPb-1oOyNM3F87-007RUe; Fri, 29 Jul 2022 22:32:04 +0200
Message-ID: <ef406e88-2e97-bca9-0ead-22d742657aec@gmx.at>
Date: Fri, 29 Jul 2022 22:32:01 +0200
MIME-Version: 1.0
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64; rv:91.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/91.11.0
To: Joe Touch <touch@strayalpha.com>
Cc: Neal Cardwell <ncardwell=40google.com@dmarc.ietf.org>, Bob Briscoe <ietf@bobbriscoe.net>, tcpm <tcpm@ietf.org>
References: <d2ac978d-9936-5fed-28db-9c43f80a474f@gmx.at> <0F006177-04AD-4979-9EAA-B2BA611C1CD0@strayalpha.com>
From: "Scheffenegger, Richard" <rs.ietf@gmx.at>
In-Reply-To: <0F006177-04AD-4979-9EAA-B2BA611C1CD0@strayalpha.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"; format="flowed"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
X-Provags-ID: V03:K1:AbfBSAf6FTz3g04NvT1AZPaylo76Dhdc7ZUGtcubs+epKXjOuZH 90nldXXoXfEBPFDHPbp6mD3RJmVjjGUCpj9/Wrzhvr7MSxOt1aGWuSN+Evh6eh44wK42jOg 2yHzQOSNey9BVKubkRWnfD21FXyTRw8Q1lEy/XMna7qjHvF8nds1RnwHo8ic0UYfugik+n4 M3uyGsTCIuXejREglcDAw==
X-UI-Out-Filterresults: notjunk:1;V03:K0:36mPeoo58JI=:yk0iawc+nCqMM5cN2iHBra fdkIMUkmiTKOdAtebU146WrxIGMGaPH7BOQXivUhw/zMb1EG1wI2smbMNcTA8SYdJvY/f/lPv WPojRatDH27iU3GYA05zsVIDWVbWYdwkzHTLOYLSqsCt9pvcotlh2eBvxYN8h6RbXUquXBx9+ aER10k8KDj7ztVU091/gy3bnlxjpuQmGTJ7xE+8EKMQ4IiLmZaHOx+x+AWBWm/7zytTagDRPu YjA135a86CK4OPVio6TKyc5XbGYXHyNb5WA6fEooQ9SY5vdTEEZiKIBt7fdcTJy1U/ZYK2Bem KupTmw/IZjdeNS3PP7kgzX2s3KI+vlo4/exz1gHWhH5SqAQv8LcD1WTFgDQ8vRRz48JWWlWFr 7PTES8aHNiS0WK/9PWSGTH5MEp9OPGtCEZ/V6cmEFWPb/yzNlZwEuMMwKvwZHG4GrHtgwvWTR iRqXe5USgRk/2h2fD8b2HtJyC0QymdwXme0lzTcFbxNl5yFnElAJ1zZAZx/IhYrDzmK50SRG6 Y3ZVGn+8JvFMi7wzjZBMTA/LTELltPNXL9ENEZYrvAmc1s3BcbP0hZV9wQ2cGgXGlZVyu7hIO SGJQDvHcEBb9TW0zSIuHAeKeZ5fH84LQGpssAkn1an64h/Zhn90QA7/wLaMi1RDrmswFuSkkq SSL8LgeMpo5M5WfvRnz39C5Kq1YJFKJzTKBd9BE/f6uQzJbPkTzdF41IwfVg2XAjgKBFpnJZC g4sXZ1QVwL18J2WR26aUHYIemHltXqQfHJnV38+QshZlbxHvi72dG/p1rzhJJdw2I34/ti+c6 RClALUFA7yCwuWlRPwSd/erdBdWVGwZj/eyt++0UuTSPw0XHfWcQRG066l1x6fBJ9Fti0vOQ1 r0ZIXzibMMbM/RyDSVot0VlwcLj0MuELFKG1KryoNTFUHPg9bv/vPf4mULZcb4guB0izsufD9 vxa9VtOSyIzKAWPIyH/j/0nxqUIL0YF3zAjlZ+OSzHRKLWxkuh3lWbu+hseKWtextX1d6FS+L k2qk4zVMXeAa1r/MV8pkfHA7e9fKV7CrpMEe1zsTQNIszI67vImpplWvhHhXd+hnYoaoYoPrl JKHpDR7V9QsKoliMTZFaXabmAqeJt7yKJ4eaHtDtOnEfVCOFUBvzL6cVA==
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/tcpm/8rfViJXWkeggOZUknJpMZDsMTcY>
Subject: Re: [tcpm] AccECN: summary text about omitting unchanged fields
X-BeenThere: tcpm@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.39
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: Fri, 29 Jul 2022 20:32:49 -0000

I've been describing one particular implementations details - not
endorsing this to be the way to do it in any IETF documented form. Sorry
if this was not clear.

Am 29.07.2022 um 22:17 schrieb Joe Touch:
>
>
>> On Jul 29, 2022, at 3:55 PM, Scheffenegger, Richard <rs.ietf@gmx.at> wrote:
>>
>> BTW, the Option Sender (data receiver) code I created first fills all
>> the otherwise needed TCP options, and then stuffs the remainder of the
>> available TCP option space by a AccECN option as large as possible
>> (preferring the variant, where the changed fields are coming first).
>
> I don’t think this is a reasonable rule. You cannot declare this as ‘must be final’ or even ‘must be processed last’. We get to do that with only one option and I don’t think we know this should be that one.
>
> Joe

v2.39.1 | Report a Bug | By Email | System Status