Re: [tcpm] TCPM rechartering discussion

[Yuchung Cheng <[e-mail]>]

Are middleboxes issues (NAT messing up TCP) part of the charter.

also is there an RFC (or draft) for this ?
" * The WG is writing an informational document about the ways in
which TCPs can handle ICMP "soft errors". "

Thanks,

Yuchung

On Mon, Feb 20, 2012 at 2:19 AM, SCHARF, Michael
<[e-mail]> wrote:
> Dear all,
>
> The current TCPM charter https://datatracker.ietf.org/wg/tcpm/charter/
> includes some outdated text. Most notably, the "Specific Goals"
> mentioned in the charter are not up to date. Also, the current charter
> requires IESG approval of every new milestone.
>
> Therefore, the chairs think that it would make sense to recharter TCPM
> in order to clean up the completed goals and to make it easier to manage
> future milestones. Please find below a first draft for a new charter
> text. The intention is a minor modification that does not to affect the
> overall scope of the working group.
>
> We would highly appreciate comments or suggestions.
>
> Best regards
>
> Michael (TCPM co-chair)
>
>
>
>
> TCP Maintenance and Minor Extensions (tcpm)
> -------------------------------------------
>
> Description of Working Group: ***DRAFT***
>
> TCP is currently the Internet's predominant transport protocol.
> To maintain TCP's utility the IETF has regularly updated both
> the protocol itself and the congestion control algorithms
> implemented by the protocol that are crucial for the stability
> of the Internet. These changes reflect our evolving
> understanding of transport protocols, congestion control and new
> needs presented by an ever-changing network. The TCPM WG provides
> a venue within the IETF to work on these issues. The WG
> serves several purposes:
>
> * The WG mostly focuses on maintenance issues (e.g., bug
> fixes) and modest changes to the protocol and algorithms
> that maintain TCP's utility, including incremental enhancements
> of the congestion control mechanisms.
>
> * The WG is a venue for moving current TCP specifications
> along the standards track (as community energy is available
> for such efforts).
>
> * The focus of the working group are minor extensions to TCP
> algorithms and mechanisms. In cases where these are
> directly applicable to other transports (e.g. SCTP or DCCP),
> the mappings to other transports may be specified alongside
> that for TCP, but significant additions and changes to other
> transports are not in scope.
>
> TCPM is the working group within the IETF that handles small TCP
> changes, or minor extensions to TCP algorithms and mechanisms. While
> fundamental changes to TCP or its congestion control algorithms
> (e.g., departure from loss-based congestion control) should be brought
> through TCPM, it is expected that such large changes will be handled
> by other working groups or require additional reviews, in particular by
> the IRTF Congestion Control Research Group (ICCRG).
>
> TCP's congestion control algorithms are the model followed by
> alternate transports (e.g., SCTP and (in some cases) DCCP),
> which are handled for instance by the Transport Area WG (tsvwg).
> The IETF has recently worked on several documents
> about algorithms that are specified for multiple protocols
> (e.g., TCP and SCTP) in the same document. Which WG shepherds
> such documents will determined on a case-by-case
> basis. In any case, the TCPM WG will remain in close contact
> with other relevant WGs working on these protocols to ensure
> openness and stringent review from all angles.
>
> New TCPM milestones that fall within the scope specified within
> the charter can be added after approval of the working group and the
> responsible Area Director.
>
> _______________________________________________
> tcpm mailing list
> [e-mail]
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tcpm