IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [tcpm] Feedback on WG acceptance of draft-zimmermann-tcpm-cubic-01

Yuchung Cheng <ycheng@google.com> Wed, 29 April 2015 15:41 UTC

Return-Path: <ycheng@google.com>
X-Original-To: tcpm@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: tcpm@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 22B071A2119 for <tcpm@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 29 Apr 2015 08:41:28 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.389
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.389 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FM_FORGED_GMAIL=0.622, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.01] autolearn=no
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 WCLwm2egGSOT for <tcpm@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 29 Apr 2015 08:41:26 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-ie0-x235.google.com (mail-ie0-x235.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4001:c03::235]) (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 269291A6EF4 for <tcpm@ietf.org>; Wed, 29 Apr 2015 08:41:20 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by iecrt8 with SMTP id rt8so45381996iec.0 for <tcpm@ietf.org>; Wed, 29 Apr 2015 08:41:19 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc:content-type; bh=zDozdqYv9NgtiyBwQh0zzqjcacAE8Ayf/M3S9Z15kDg=; b=MUbwSgnqLmFddG90qlvR/9qj/mGXuxLLP4vbxV+6MsqJ1F6Teo+wi6774CifvEBA5L fP1ZlOosnQdqZ1smlzfGtGbmVDQJOaHBiaCA9hI791IUGLCqNqjq5la2AgeP+kV9AMWr P+9bVVSe2ZanOoZdqgrJZuVUnPcC11iFrc8EixkOGwYALCTCi1aYZu/Bsg0ADZxQhedV ZoqfMSoCePso+5M2n38TfTyjqBt0ekJ0964QY4ERTYDfLAmWXynSyaPsLr4K0LY3CYG6 lLDLvjFAtlI7bIihYgjENV3UQYrRLPm6MEc0y1Zrl7C9jWuj1phgMTkKZv1V1QmA2zRp 5Hgg==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc:content-type; bh=zDozdqYv9NgtiyBwQh0zzqjcacAE8Ayf/M3S9Z15kDg=; b=Nrt1AnITz3vv6F6bHwQtvkdVyiXH+sVu/j34jbz/71s1ijuZoB3VECDrQV1ZvM6wyG Nw8Zllwoz3kICuom5Z5lD9JWqTjEaL/787Q68bW5VdDZPrUQ3JO6JXZdGzQH8ucDGR8T 53nHNOOyK8ODXiBS6pMpFiyynTaEOUPv4u4u94QGt5h4erIHV1OD26ushxBsheHa3f3R oCQ/ti9aJlardbWx/UuA+JH1fq3Lc+3zemh/H4DHNHtpbvCMkcTia8e2+yDqXXDLLNCT udIUapRTLP0VKTg0TwuqVnJZLZEZ1vLM4W75H0R/9fPRtYiWhj32IiCiDHFxDxa+IN1+ 0IMQ==
X-Gm-Message-State: ALoCoQlxrsQkIzwNkk3tZrXKAwY5vG8EDpyl0puWmCTvolA3TzkuQ5y7CWbK6l9cmbGGrdVVtkox
X-Received: by 10.50.114.9 with SMTP id jc9mr21478217igb.49.1430322079319; Wed, 29 Apr 2015 08:41:19 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.64.24.44 with HTTP; Wed, 29 Apr 2015 08:40:38 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <f66ed0bbaeeb41faa8b41748969a4032@hioexcmbx05-prd.hq.netapp.com>
References: <655C07320163294895BBADA28372AF5D16C939DA@FR712WXCHMBA15.zeu.alcatel-lucent.com> <f66ed0bbaeeb41faa8b41748969a4032@hioexcmbx05-prd.hq.netapp.com>
From: Yuchung Cheng <ycheng@google.com>
Date: Wed, 29 Apr 2015 08:40:38 -0700
Message-ID: <CAK6E8=c+qHMFeuTVMnVK0+vR_E1q-bWBhf_BzcyjxKOxBP+ppA@mail.gmail.com>
To: "Scheffenegger, Richard" <rs@netapp.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Archived-At: <http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/tcpm/Anb3mcyIT8g8mgh_ABtKQhh7V68>
Cc: "tcpm@ietf.org" <tcpm@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [tcpm] Feedback on WG acceptance of draft-zimmermann-tcpm-cubic-01
X-BeenThere: tcpm@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
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: <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: Wed, 29 Apr 2015 15:41:28 -0000

I vote for informational, unless the WG consensus recommends cubic as
standard congestion control.

On Wed, Apr 29, 2015 at 5:32 AM, Scheffenegger, Richard <rs@netapp.com> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I'm still in support, on standards track.. From my point of view, the definitions in [4] don't quite match here (but I would probably be content with informational, if something really limits submission as standards track).
>
> Best regards,
>   Richard
>
>
>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: tcpm [mailto:tcpm-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Scharf, Michael
>> (Michael)
>> Sent: Mittwoch, 22. April 2015 10:54
>> To: tcpm@ietf.org
>> Subject: [tcpm] Feedback on WG acceptance of draft-zimmermann-tcpm-cubic-
>> 01
>>
>> Dear all,
>>
>> During IETF 91 [1] and on the list there has been strong support for WG
>> adoption of draft-zimmermann-tcpm-cubic [2]. It seems consensus in TCPM to
>> adopt this document.
>>
>> In order to move forward, the chairs seek for additional community
>> guidance regarding the intended status:
>>
>> a) Proposed standard
>>
>> b) Experimental
>>
>> c) Informational
>>
>> During IETF 91, there was strong support for Proposed Standard [1]. Yet,
>> given the running code and the potential evolution of congestion control
>> algorithms in future, the chairs want to ensure that there is strong
>> consensus in TCPM on the intended status. Also, we would like to handle
>> this question consistently among potential other alternative congestion
>> control algorithms.
>>
>> Additional information regarding the RFC status can be found in [3], and
>> there is also an IESG statement on the difference between Experimental and
>> Informational [4].
>>
>> Please let us know any feedback on the WG acceptance of draft-zimmermann-
>> tcpm-cubic-01 and specifically the intended status until May 8.
>>
>> Thanks!
>>
>> Michael, Pasi, Yoshifumi
>>
>>
>> [1] http://www.ietf.org/proceedings/91/minutes/minutes-91-tcpm
>>
>> [2] https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-zimmermann-tcpm-cubic-01
>>
>> [2] RFC 2026, Section 4.1.1, 4.2.1, 4.2.2
>>
>> [3] https://www.ietf.org/iesg/informational-vs-experimental.html
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> 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

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email