Re: [tcpm] Is ECN a valid TCP header flag?

"Scharf, Michael" <Michael.Scharf@hs-esslingen.de> Fri, 24 September 2021 10:25 UTC

Return-Path: <Michael.Scharf@hs-esslingen.de>
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 4F3B23A22B4 for <tcpm@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 24 Sep 2021 03:25:55 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.098
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.098 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, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H2=-0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_NONE=0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=hs-esslingen.de
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 cdgs9a9VmLbk for <tcpm@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 24 Sep 2021 03:25:49 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail.hs-esslingen.de (mail.hs-esslingen.de [134.108.32.78]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 738893A22AC for <tcpm@ietf.org>; Fri, 24 Sep 2021 03:25:29 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from localhost (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by mail.hs-esslingen.de (Postfix) with ESMTP id 087AC25A36; Fri, 24 Sep 2021 12:25:26 +0200 (CEST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=hs-esslingen.de; s=mail; t=1632479126; bh=wne1asBBt8fjsI4nczOlGskrthhV1XgSRfdaxfKaTHs=; h=From:To:Subject:Date:References:In-Reply-To:From; b=zt9EwCsH5iuWPLxCxnNOom8Cd7uoIy0J0B4iTo2M7hYkPDigbHRs8iztJ3VHYJ/bL QvovCwAU4SemaP7620qx0hcyo3sUKkb8EFakP1+e+HihSVq9f2ZB66NJMiQduk7qcC /arVxTuprdCTm4Xh0r+iBpozmCUswZbH3UifXEM4=
X-Virus-Scanned: by amavisd-new-2.7.1 (20120429) (Debian) at hs-esslingen.de
Received: from mail.hs-esslingen.de ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (hs-esslingen.de [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 4xfrItcQWlo1; Fri, 24 Sep 2021 12:25:24 +0200 (CEST)
Received: from rznt8202.rznt.rzdir.fht-esslingen.de (rznt8202.hs-esslingen.de [134.108.48.165]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail.hs-esslingen.de (Postfix) with ESMTPS; Fri, 24 Sep 2021 12:25:24 +0200 (CEST)
Received: from rznt8202.rznt.rzdir.fht-esslingen.de (134.108.48.165) by rznt8202.rznt.rzdir.fht-esslingen.de (134.108.48.165) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_128_GCM_SHA256) id 15.1.2176.14; Fri, 24 Sep 2021 12:25:24 +0200
Received: from rznt8202.rznt.rzdir.fht-esslingen.de ([fe80::aca4:171a:3ee1:57e0]) by rznt8202.rznt.rzdir.fht-esslingen.de ([fe80::aca4:171a:3ee1:57e0%3]) with mapi id 15.01.2176.014; Fri, 24 Sep 2021 12:25:24 +0200
From: "Scharf, Michael" <Michael.Scharf@hs-esslingen.de>
To: t petch <ietfa@btconnect.com>, tcpm <tcpm@ietf.org>
Thread-Topic: [tcpm] Is ECN a valid TCP header flag?
Thread-Index: AQHXsSvY9VH6l1WsTkeWZf0raQsZCKuy+Twg
Date: Fri, 24 Sep 2021 10:25:24 +0000
Message-ID: <f658da464f354a3bb7cda1331c1898f3@hs-esslingen.de>
References: <614DA301.4030902@btconnect.com>
In-Reply-To: <614DA301.4030902@btconnect.com>
Accept-Language: de-DE, en-US
Content-Language: de-DE
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
x-originating-ip: [134.108.140.248]
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
MIME-Version: 1.0
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/tcpm/FvnMe3ZaOUUdYfU6QJhIrEQpnTk>
Subject: Re: [tcpm] Is ECN a valid TCP header flag?
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: Fri, 24 Sep 2021 10:25:55 -0000

Thanks for the heads-up!

As already noted by Tom, there are multiple documents in the I2NSF working group. 

As TSV-ART reviewer, I have pushed already back against similar issues in draft-ietf-i2nsf-capability-data-model: https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/i2nsf/94nz77vNHDpP8DkbXb2hzuuBjRk/

It would probably help if more contributors to TCPM have a look at these documents in I2NSF.

Michael


> -----Original Message-----
> From: tcpm <tcpm-bounces@ietf.org> On Behalf Of t petch
> Sent: Friday, September 24, 2021 12:06 PM
> To: tcpm <tcpm@ietf.org>
> Subject: [tcpm] Is ECN a valid TCP header flag?
> 
> This question came to me seeing the IESG discussion of an OPSAWG I-D
> which modelled, in part, TCP, in YANG, but did not model it the way TCPM
> does.
> 
> There is a lot of this about, as in I2NSF, which has the most detailed
> model I see of TCP although not in a way that is likely to be used by
> those operating TCP.
> 
> Thus draft-ietf-i2nsf-nsf-facing-interface-dm provides identities such as
>      identity tcp-flags {
> which is then used as
> 
>    base tcp-flags;
>      identity cwr {
>      identity ecn {
>      identity urg {
>      identity ack {
>      identity psh {
>      identity rst {
>      identity syn {
>      identity fin {
> with descriptions and references.  My knowledge of this is limited but I
> suspect that the reference for 'ecn' should be RFC3168 and not RFC793
> but then should it be 'ece' and not 'ecn'?  I suspect that a TCP expert
> might see rather more idiosyncrasies.  Is RFC793 still the right
> reference or should it be 793bis? Both are used.
> 
> Details of TCP also appear in
> draft-ietf-i2nsf-capability-data-model
> draft-ietf-i2nsf-consumer-facing-interface-dm
> draft-ietf-i2nsf-nsf-monitoring-data-model
> as do details of IP and a wide range of application and transport
> protocols; I suspect that those with an attention to detail and an
> interest in transport could have a field day here.
> 
> Tom Petch
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> tcpm mailing list
> tcpm@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tcpm