RE: [tcpm] I-D ACTION:draft-ietf-tcpm-tcp-uto-03.txt

Fernando Gont <fernando@gont.com.ar> Fri, 15 September 2006 10:50 UTC

Received: from [127.0.0.1] (helo=stiedprmman1.va.neustar.com) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1GOBGi-0008UY-0z; Fri, 15 Sep 2006 06:50:00 -0400
Received: from [10.91.34.44] (helo=ietf-mx.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1GOBGg-0008PZ-93 for tcpm@ietf.org; Fri, 15 Sep 2006 06:49:58 -0400
Received: from smtp1.xmundo.net ([201.216.232.80]) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1GOBGd-0006x9-58 for tcpm@ietf.org; Fri, 15 Sep 2006 06:49:58 -0400
Received: from venus.xmundo.net (venus.xmundo.net [201.216.232.56]) by smtp1.xmundo.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2DA0DF0C562; Fri, 15 Sep 2006 07:52:40 -0300 (ART)
Received: from fgont.gont.com.ar (171-180-231-201.fibertel.com.ar [201.231.180.171]) (authenticated bits=0) by venus.xmundo.net (8.12.11/8.12.11) with ESMTP id k8FAmisa029402; Fri, 15 Sep 2006 07:49:25 -0300
Message-Id: <7.0.1.0.0.20060915053023.06212108@gont.com.ar>
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 7.0.1.0
Date: Fri, 15 Sep 2006 05:39:17 -0300
To: "Caitlin Bestler" <caitlinb@broadcom.com>, "Lars Eggert" <lars.eggert@netlab.nec.de>, tcpm@ietf.org
From: Fernando Gont <fernando@gont.com.ar>
Subject: RE: [tcpm] I-D ACTION:draft-ietf-tcpm-tcp-uto-03.txt
In-Reply-To: <54AD0F12E08D1541B826BE97C98F99F196420B@NT-SJCA-0751.brcm.a d.broadcom.com>
References: <41E932BF-B860-4AC8-9370-F240D33155CE@netlab.nec.de> <54AD0F12E08D1541B826BE97C98F99F196420B@NT-SJCA-0751.brcm.ad.broadcom.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed
X-Spam-Score: 1.9 (+)
X-Scan-Signature: 8abaac9e10c826e8252866cbe6766464
Cc: Godred Fairhurst <gorry@erg.abdn.ac.uk>
X-BeenThere: tcpm@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5
Precedence: list
List-Id: TCP Maintenance and Minor Extensions Working Group <tcpm.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tcpm>, <mailto:tcpm-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Post: <mailto:tcpm@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:tcpm-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tcpm>, <mailto:tcpm-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
Errors-To: tcpm-bounces@ietf.org

At 18:18 13/09/2006, Caitlin Bestler wrote:

>At the time that the passive side responds to a SYN request
>the allocated resource, if any, might not be capable of recording
>the remote peer's hint.

You mean, eg., an implementation of SYN cookies?


>A statement that the passive side MAY ignore the UTO option on
>a SYN is of course unneeded, since the draft is quite clear
>that either side MAY ignore the UTO option on any packet.
>
>But it might be useful to suggest that the active side
>SHOULD provide the initial UTO in the first non-SYN
>rather than assuming it was remembered from the SYN.

Makes sense to me. (I was just about to say that with SYN cookies in 
place, there are lots of enhancements that are lost... but I just 
read Andre's post, so... ;-) )

Kindest regards,

--
Fernando Gont
e-mail: fernando@gont.com.ar || fgont@acm.org
PGP Fingerprint: 7809 84F5 322E 45C7 F1C9 3945 96EE A9EF D076 FFF1






_______________________________________________
tcpm mailing list
tcpm@ietf.org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tcpm