Re: [tcpm] poll for adoption of draft-ananth-persist-02

John Heffner <johnwheffner@gmail.com> Mon, 22 March 2010 21:41 UTC

Return-Path: <johnwheffner@gmail.com>
X-Original-To: tcpm@core3.amsl.com
Delivered-To: tcpm@core3.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2F3DC28C147 for <tcpm@core3.amsl.com>; Mon, 22 Mar 2010 14:41:45 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.034
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.034 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.565, BAYES_00=-2.599, DNS_FROM_OPENWHOIS=1.13]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id f2akqLqXuaJI for <tcpm@core3.amsl.com>; Mon, 22 Mar 2010 14:41:44 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-ww0-f44.google.com (mail-ww0-f44.google.com [74.125.82.44]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5562C3A67AE for <tcpm@ietf.org>; Mon, 22 Mar 2010 14:41:30 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by wwg30 with SMTP id 30so2571380wwg.31 for <tcpm@ietf.org>; Mon, 22 Mar 2010 14:41:42 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:mime-version:received:in-reply-to:references :date:message-id:subject:from:to:cc:content-type :content-transfer-encoding; bh=h2k3xVNEityvb6kqB5M5FgbZL007aOITMr+57dCMTuE=; b=rw9a9ZE2jZ6JopBt4yKxAWmgg01Aase7yyONTGsbI7fKSXxiWuRip3uSRCTAvZ3NJb sXAivs3jCwY3lI7wlN0wpinV812rTBOOuoM+O9iBrDQps6fkkyjaEIdT5izTF6GKSXAk /hZvX/oqw6Es4yDdTm4LzzJha/icaOO8ylH/E=
DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :cc:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; b=rN6KTEZZst98lgdn6xPjd1ZGMv7q5zDrnO4VcrGHyIZtB1vqVRAwFqTDMXNzumiFd/ 8TRNXutti2dLCvdQl1YqdIQjMLxVvXimO7krkm6wDIjkvjuhqmlVmnoZNSzWexFBTEJt uGoZ/YTYGKM+dVdo9zZInAjUqXmJ1oDikLjBA=
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.216.85.130 with SMTP id u2mr2793589wee.49.1269294102724; Mon, 22 Mar 2010 14:41:42 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <C304DB494AC0C04C87C6A6E2FF5603DB47DF997794@NDJSSCC01.ndc.nasa.gov>
References: <Acq++HhKPa/WNfamRcGprqSmMXJeBg==> <C304DB494AC0C04C87C6A6E2FF5603DB47DF997794@NDJSSCC01.ndc.nasa.gov>
Date: Mon, 22 Mar 2010 17:41:42 -0400
Message-ID: <1e41a3231003221441s57d77a53m255fbe8c00cb370@mail.gmail.com>
From: John Heffner <johnwheffner@gmail.com>
To: "Eddy, Wesley M. (GRC-MS00)[ASRC AEROSPACE CORP]" <wesley.m.eddy@nasa.gov>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Cc: "tcpm@ietf.org" <tcpm@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [tcpm] poll for adoption of draft-ananth-persist-02
X-BeenThere: tcpm@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
List-Id: TCP Maintenance and Minor Extensions Working Group <tcpm.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/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: Mon, 22 Mar 2010 21:41:45 -0000

I read the new version of this draft.  For the record, my opinion
hasn't changed since the -00 version, which is that publication of
this draft as an RFC would be harmful.  I don't object to the simple
clarifying statement that a connection may be aborted while in the
persist state.  (I'm not sure this requires a new RFC.)  However, this
draft goes beyond that, implying that connections should be aborted
*because* they are in persist state.

In practical terms, what is the difference between a connection in
persist state, and one where a receiver acknowledges one byte of data
every 10 seconds, never advertising a zero window?

  -John


On Mon, Mar 8, 2010 at 3:49 PM, Eddy, Wesley M. (GRC-MS00)[ASRC
AEROSPACE CORP] <wesley.m.eddy@nasa.gov> wrote:
> The authors have updated draft-ananth-persist, and asked
> us to poll the TCPM WG to have this particular document
> adopted with an Informational target.
>
> http://www.ietf.org/id/draft-ananth-tcpm-persist-02.txt
>
> This has been discussed to some extent on the mailing
> list and at the Dublin meeting.  The authors have
> responded to comments received thus far and updated the
> document as it grew from the outcome of prior feedback
> on the draft-mahesh-persist-timeout document.
>
> Please respond if you either:
>
> (1) Support making this document a WG document with the
>    target for Informational.
>
> (2) Oppose making this document a WG document.
>
> Of course, other comments are also welcome :).
>
> It's relatively short, so if people could respond in the
> next 2 weeks, this would allow us to determine consensus
> during the week of the IETF meeting.
>
> --
> Wes Eddy
> MTI Systems
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> tcpm mailing list
> tcpm@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tcpm
>