[tcpm] call for feedback on SYN-EXT-OPT draft

Hi folks,

As we have discussed in the last WG meeting, we need more comments to think
about how to proceed with draft-touch-tcpm-tcp-syn-ext-opt
So, we really appreciate your feedback on this.  If you have any questions,
comments, please send them to the list.

BTW, I have one question on this draft. I think I've seen some folks have
tried to implement EDO before, but how about this draft?
Because sending and receiving OOB packets as additional SYN packets sounds
a bit tricky to implement, I think it'll be great if someone has an
implementation report.
I am also wondering if some folks have some ideas on how it is safe to use
OOB packets over middleboxes.

Thanks,
--
Yoshi

On Fri, Mar 4, 2022 at 11:05 AM touch@strayalpha.com <touch@strayalpha.com>
wrote:

> Hi, all,
>
> I’d like to request:
>
> a) WGLC for EDO
>
> b) some sort of WG decision on whether to adopt it as experimental (and,
> AFAICT, go to WGLC, given we’re already been around the block with it) or
> give me the go-ahead to submit it as individual experimental
>
> Both drafts are active through April, so I’ll hold on re-issuing until (b).
>
> Thanks,
>
>
> —
> Dr. Joe Touch, temporal epistemologist
> www.strayalpha.com
>
> On Oct 12, 2021, at 1:07 PM, Wesley Eddy <wes@mti-systems.com> wrote:
>
> On 10/12/2021 3:50 PM, touch@strayalpha.com wrote:
>
>
> - are there any open issues or pending suggestions to TCP EDO to prepare
> it for last call?
>
> I think it's in good shape for a last call.  It's stable and addresses all
> of the feedback to date, aside from greater implementation and field
> experience.  At the moment, it seems like QUIC has solved the burning need
> we had for TCP options space, by attracting all the work that would
> normally need more options. However, after many years of discussion about
> how to handle this for TCP, and many candidates, the EDO approach was the
> one the working group was able to get consensus around, and we really
> should wrap up and publish it, IMHO.
>
>
> - would the WG like to adopt SYN-EXT-OPT as experimental as well or would
> it be preferred (and OK) to submit this as individual/experimental if not?
>
> Either approach is fine with me, and I prefer either of them rather than
> not advancing anything.  I would be willing to contribute reviews for
> either path.
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> tcpm mailing list
> tcpm@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tcpm
>
>
>