IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [tcpm] draft-ietf-tcpm-hystartplusplus and QUIC

Yoshifumi Nishida <nsd.ietf@gmail.com> Tue, 20 September 2022 08:37 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 A6739C14CF01 for <tcpm@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 20 Sep 2022 01:37:14 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -7.107
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-7.107 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, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, RCVD_IN_ZEN_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=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 (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com
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 yCgkEyalCdqF for <tcpm@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 20 Sep 2022 01:37:14 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-wm1-x32d.google.com (mail-wm1-x32d.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4864:20::32d]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 (128/128 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4C1BEC14F72A for <tcpm@ietf.org>; Tue, 20 Sep 2022 01:37:14 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-wm1-x32d.google.com with SMTP id n8so1337732wmr.5 for <tcpm@ietf.org>; Tue, 20 Sep 2022 01:37:14 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20210112; h=cc:to:subject:message-id:date:from:in-reply-to:references :mime-version:from:to:cc:subject:date; bh=74AuFHVWXOFfle4jg4NU44qDSWItIbT6vd33fgRsHVM=; b=ArnKuJ9bZJoE5tVxzsFLczIfWBoiqrI95PmpM79ctQ0wOiD72txbgQnATakQwWc6tz yqh/vChkJ3wf17I7sWm9ibAnEUCip/BmskWAwIT0DsZ8f8BNu1KX2FzpprADWsrYbxpo MQoOVQ0c0jTDb4KzVKLZgV9hur22QnVZmwqQ1I5eR4G34pMGukVwri/mBJZrtrsvK/24 aT/15k5x+h3ZUdVAq46YdfE67Bq1YO8FvkUAjqZ+NILEDcE9IkhZVIPmthIIXTbgWIvm R9f9jD4ZQ1uTQGLrGIrUYCMmPoubRsdf14n93MZK3y06qIfPh7LMll1DgM1I0N9wAmrl Emlg==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20210112; h=cc:to:subject:message-id:date:from:in-reply-to:references :mime-version:x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc:subject:date; bh=74AuFHVWXOFfle4jg4NU44qDSWItIbT6vd33fgRsHVM=; b=X4p1nj4lIJGEm3VteP0YDVdhD1GVXUMTRouih710eJUlXxlTg6I9DZM9W7Lzj8FgOY NJfE5Qr8wgPRleaskjaFcnKr6ZyjCEZ+5V4tOLlogPtdQmvfQG8SzM4JtfY7kEC0nBsd /joflp4hIqiGkMa/mgzgVg+wDJ7AuUnUJ3xOpswnVgsFYYC3d3jOe5vHe6BXxUvlUC7K Xdbtm2p28rT8O/MZ9kiwFNQsjT2rGSmopw7Om3dE75q5ZA2cM/2vfEEBBxBiRLpMlhZx wtopWbtQOKEaNcBDv2nY/hrYn3ADGp/PuPjuzPQq57/SvPk2S+ofP2EaV2Jq12n405FK tqAw==
X-Gm-Message-State: ACrzQf2FteRKRDarS8N0wSxuUh267xPB5mi64PMeNdP3b28ZMjQ968zb bkdBd/zKzBQiXaWB1kZaMK6mcdUfXDXjxBiPj9k=
X-Google-Smtp-Source: AMsMyM6/DPq2uhsP22fXFYHacfUubjZDybA2moBady4+RaeqB61/7eo/Uz79NnlwNwcgi9NMHAhaGI+yci2pNw3Oyyc=
X-Received: by 2002:a05:600c:4209:b0:3b4:6436:ec0f with SMTP id x9-20020a05600c420900b003b46436ec0fmr1463022wmh.67.1663663032274; Tue, 20 Sep 2022 01:37:12 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <D364F578-5172-48A2-A8CD-BDC24CF2F983@lurchi.franken.de> <8317ED87-0689-42FD-AB0C-E5DD646B7C48@eggert.org>
In-Reply-To: <8317ED87-0689-42FD-AB0C-E5DD646B7C48@eggert.org>
From: Yoshifumi Nishida <nsd.ietf@gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 20 Sep 2022 01:37:00 -0700
Message-ID: <CAAK044TacXTsk91A--QdrrkObdgNbJMbKwkQy+s50ZrrM=kcxg@mail.gmail.com>
To: Lars Eggert <lars@eggert.org>
Cc: Michael Tuexen <Michael.Tuexen@lurchi.franken.de>, Christian Huitema <huitema@huitema.net>, "tcpm@ietf.org Extensions" <tcpm@ietf.org>, Zaheduzzaman Sarker <zaheduzzaman.sarker@ericsson.com>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="0000000000001091ee05e917bc98"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/tcpm/BVOGaoK_P87r9dNXzaTFVxiHc6Q>
Subject: Re: [tcpm] draft-ietf-tcpm-hystartplusplus and QUIC
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: Tue, 20 Sep 2022 08:37:14 -0000

Hi Lars,

On Mon, Sep 19, 2022 at 11:03 PM Lars Eggert <lars@eggert.org> wrote:

> On Sep 20, 2022, at 01:08, Michael Tuexen <
> Michael.Tuexen@lurchi.franken.de> wrote:
> >
> > However, most
> > of the specs use a language specific to one transport protocol but you
> can easily
> > translate them to the other. So there is some transfer to be made by the
> reader.
>
> I think that asking the reader to make that transfer is extra work and a
> potential source of ambiguities and errors. In the past, one could assume
> that everyone was deeply familiar with TCP, since that was by far the
> dominant protocol, but that situation is changing.
>

Hmm, if someone wants to propose another loss-base CC, then I guess the
person needs to refer at least RFC5681 anyway, which is very TCP specific.
But, I am not sure if we really want to update 5681 to make protocol
agnostic. I think we have similar examples like this, such as RFC9002.
I am guessing we will need to ask the readers to do translation anyway
unless we rebuild various existing RFCs.
--
Yoshi

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email