[tcpm] 793bis: TCP Quiet Time

Wesley Eddy <wes@mti-systems.com> Wed, 18 December 2019 21:33 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 EC209120236 for <tcpm@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 18 Dec 2019 13:33:50 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.9
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.9 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-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 Kvf6x_4VBb6x for <tcpm@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 18 Dec 2019 13:33:49 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail-qv1-xf35.google.com (mail-qv1-xf35.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::f35]) (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 12D5F12001A for <tcpm@ietf.org>; Wed, 18 Dec 2019 13:33:49 -0800 (PST)
Received: by mail-qv1-xf35.google.com with SMTP id x1so1363211qvr.8 for <tcpm@ietf.org>; Wed, 18 Dec 2019 13:33:49 -0800 (PST)
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-transfer-encoding:content-language; bh=4lXR6nrbkczf/UKfTg1rKu3Lhy1Qe5Vn6FgbLfDjWdc=; b=QLmin/ZdYRzK0oJwgZuo4RVGu5ZZZ+PBDMjAPU3qFbnnbrDVdiy0xjWzZ7EkWtO9D1 orUWkY9Fzyr86qE0eB2ouE0PN1GpoDTCLiVFkUTuCgYcmXiYj3w/nA5/21Xa9uMbf3k8 8IoQGUvBvfnghGXdEsMN7EQh3g8xjpMarPNkbWFuVQ2P3KLwvltucRD3HtQoVc6PKJc0 pT7xw7X/WoF52ZUJ3yLP+SOqQ5vQ+Lhke29s2mSGNDldmq7Xl87YsGVhCDGsXYqwdvui n3ratwasgVPDsHE9MwL/g+jzopEmJ8WEj7PLpSxL/onv96lR4d7hwlAvga+3dNL+HroW 4m1A==
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-transfer-encoding :content-language; bh=4lXR6nrbkczf/UKfTg1rKu3Lhy1Qe5Vn6FgbLfDjWdc=; b=r2X/K2fIJN/UvHF/FIkG0HcTJyN1UM03yUsUbTvuQEJfGOnpW6mubCfzfIYb5405YB 42cEfzAGXfpneNQSDusE20zCwZe8HlGPgiT4OOdBUv0vOOgYH833I1XEhQTH5rcrHPiF ipnw6+HKdFsvBP2nw8b6QYFScegAQAoD0rhWOZbUH1mO7VtV8BnPs/UWKMEwarHZ6eVJ EFnGl+nglvcYxaNRpfpCJCTh4vgddAPxHyJZ/d8K9w4TaDY4sC4GhzkUMDyuqsEYUXEu b0PC9rti3JKUJ86cF28X4+LBv9kgSBFJxe1uleN5FhL7j38c5FyLfl71XgvC7KK5z0Nf U2Cg==
X-Gm-Message-State: APjAAAXcUhVfL06vQaNuum56CYY258RnOqqiAVmA+PTnO9jF7tQ7ctwh lSaZCyPE1qdoJfeVY9GDfUCgN6XLIZ8=
X-Google-Smtp-Source: APXvYqy+9BRiZzwIj5NE+PYKMiftumi+RPN6n+Ts/qpfA8FhZo4g3RW8BdRoL1DBgCrbU5zW93XmpA==
X-Received: by 2002:a0c:fac1:: with SMTP id p1mr4578873qvo.231.1576704827965; Wed, 18 Dec 2019 13:33:47 -0800 (PST)
Received: from [10.100.1.112] (rrcs-69-135-1-122.central.biz.rr.com. [69.135.1.122]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id x6sm1054689qkh.20.2019.12.18.13.33.47 (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Wed, 18 Dec 2019 13:33:47 -0800 (PST)
To: gorry@erg.abdn.ac.uk, "tcpm@ietf.org" <tcpm@ietf.org>
References: <5D669BDA.3000506@erg.abdn.ac.uk> <5D66A044.3060904@erg.abdn.ac.uk>
From: Wesley Eddy <wes@mti-systems.com>
Message-ID: <5d11289c-0174-8a5e-7f47-b0110564a601@mti-systems.com>
Date: Wed, 18 Dec 2019 16:33:46 -0500
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; WOW64; rv:60.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/60.9.1
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <5D66A044.3060904@erg.abdn.ac.uk>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Content-Language: en-US
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/tcpm/FuqgrhmS6XFfesISy36i5HHtOXA>
Subject: [tcpm] 793bis: TCP Quiet Time
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: Wed, 18 Dec 2019 21:33:51 -0000

I don't think I noticed anyone responding to Gorry's comment below, and 
I haven't made any alterations in the 793bis draft with regard to this 
(other than fixing some spelling mistakes).  I wanted to pull this into 
its own thread in case other people have thoughts or would like to 
discuss further what the quiet time concept's relevance is in 2020.

On 8/28/2019 11:39 AM, Gorry Fairhurst wrote:
> OLD, Section: "   The TCP Quiet Time Concept"
> - Found this section quite amusing. Is this concept widely implemented 
> in stacks?
> - The examples given need updated, for instance one example starts "At 
> 2 megabits/sec. it takes 4.5 hours to", clearly at 10 Gbps this line 
> of thinking becomes problematic.
> - There is an odd sentence that states:
> "In the absence of knowledge
>    about the sequence numbers used on a particular connection, the TCP
>    specification recommends that the source delay for MSL seconds before
>    emitting segments on the connection, to allow time for segments from
>    the earlier connection incarnation to drain from the system."
> - how would the "source" know the MSL rather than use the Internet 
> default?
> - To me, this section raises many questions about whether this is best 
> current practice.