Re: [tcpm] Summary of updates in draft-ietf-tcpm-accurate-ecn-18
Bob Briscoe <ietf@bobbriscoe.net> Wed, 23 March 2022 18:22 UTC
Return-Path: <ietf@bobbriscoe.net>
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 5C6D53A0E0F for <tcpm@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 23 Mar 2022 11:22:42 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.109
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.109 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, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, NICE_REPLY_A=-0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_SCC_BODY_TEXT_LINE=-0.01, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=bobbriscoe.net
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 Y9lx6-DElRQH for <tcpm@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 23 Mar 2022 11:22:36 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-ssdrsserver2.hostinginterface.eu (mail-ssdrsserver2.hostinginterface.eu [185.185.85.90]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 646A53A0DB1 for <tcpm@ietf.org>; Wed, 23 Mar 2022 11:22:35 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=bobbriscoe.net; s=default; h=In-Reply-To:References:To:From:Subject: MIME-Version:Date:Message-ID:Content-Type:Sender:Reply-To:Cc: Content-Transfer-Encoding:Content-ID:Content-Description:Resent-Date: Resent-From:Resent-Sender:Resent-To:Resent-Cc:Resent-Message-ID:List-Id: List-Help:List-Unsubscribe:List-Subscribe:List-Post:List-Owner:List-Archive; bh=ozXNYfXHN5wVed4j5S+/3Y3sh8lSPwqP3XD2jfhWLEQ=; b=pxrbfdCkpogBvj2pgCrYmqdYrF NC34VixgrG2rf1sEXauqx3If0z4/IGbp50MR9xgE3pv4SsfjtjsliXsJFmmkXMuEHvjMV9ce9915d 9gHOSumPOGmHamYT9UgCCWx/wWrhCIFbUXVuLlOsPu0DQEkMvsNG3n+25OVE4Uel9SHTVGpVschiR b7XjZIS2lX/fuY9Gc/icnAuA3juL1xHJoOGabRnDO0yMREvSxl8/H8rVk52A1dKeeUkh1zirG2FSp X35U/GfHPzoZkFur88ZCAYKjh5d6vdrby5UoKONkwRvZadIJkuFJWerKS27kkbIOWQ/kfZuqwnc8Y hv6ABIFw==;
Received: from 67.153.238.178.in-addr.arpa ([178.238.153.67]:54594 helo=[192.168.1.4]) by ssdrsserver2.hostinginterface.eu with esmtpsa (TLS1.2) tls TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 (Exim 4.94.2) (envelope-from <ietf@bobbriscoe.net>) id 1nX5d2-000505-64 for tcpm@ietf.org; Wed, 23 Mar 2022 18:22:34 +0000
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="------------l8PvOiL2UCJkVaB3gvYBXc7E"
Message-ID: <9d618e7c-a5f0-174f-367a-afe9b3ea9e31@bobbriscoe.net>
Date: Wed, 23 Mar 2022 18:22:33 +0000
MIME-Version: 1.0
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:91.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/91.5.0
Content-Language: en-GB
From: Bob Briscoe <ietf@bobbriscoe.net>
To: tcpm IETF list <tcpm@ietf.org>
References: <a0d1b690-219a-37a0-66ab-967727355510@bobbriscoe.net>
In-Reply-To: <a0d1b690-219a-37a0-66ab-967727355510@bobbriscoe.net>
X-AntiAbuse: This header was added to track abuse, please include it with any abuse report
X-AntiAbuse: Primary Hostname - ssdrsserver2.hostinginterface.eu
X-AntiAbuse: Original Domain - ietf.org
X-AntiAbuse: Originator/Caller UID/GID - [47 12] / [47 12]
X-AntiAbuse: Sender Address Domain - bobbriscoe.net
X-Get-Message-Sender-Via: ssdrsserver2.hostinginterface.eu: authenticated_id: in@bobbriscoe.net
X-Authenticated-Sender: ssdrsserver2.hostinginterface.eu: in@bobbriscoe.net
X-Source:
X-Source-Args:
X-Source-Dir:
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/tcpm/LMWt2dTqUCzsi9Q2GRIMzB7tuMI>
Subject: Re: [tcpm] Summary of updates in draft-ietf-tcpm-accurate-ecn-18
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: Wed, 23 Mar 2022 18:22:43 -0000
Gorry, On 22/03/2022 11:49, Bob Briscoe wrote: > tcpm-ers, > > I must apologise to Vidhi. After the excellent discussions on the list > about whether to respond to congestion feedback after mangling has > been detected, we had broadly agreed the text. But then I introduced a > load of other changes at draft-17, but omitted all the ones agreed > with Vidhi. So I just posted a new rev (-18) with them all in. > > I also reviewed all the occurrences of normative words that appeared > in lower-case (must, should, may, recommended). In the two cases below > where it seemed non-controversial, I upper-cased to RECOMMENDED, but > pls review. In other cases, where there was potential for > misunderstanding, I reworded to 'needs to', 'ought to', might, etc. > > So, I've just posted a new rev. Here's the summary of the diff (see > list archive for previous discussion): > > * Changes related to Normative text > o Throughout: reworded lower-case normative words, except > upper-cased these two: > + §1 > <https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-ietf-tcpm-accurate-ecn#section-1> > RECOMMENDED that AccECN implemented alongside SACK and > ECN++ (was 'recommended') > + §3.2.3 > <https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-ietf-tcpm-accurate-ecn#section-3.2.3> > strongly RECOMMENDED to also test path traversal of the > AccECN Option (was 'recommended') > [BB] Following from your comment in tcpm just now, I've just removed 'strongly'. Altho, I would agree that adding why the recommendation is important would be preferable, it's obvious enough already from context, so I left it as it is: "If a Data Receiver intends to send the AccECN Option at any time during the rest of the connection it is [strongly] RECOMMENDED to also test path traversal of the AccECN Option as specified in Section..." Bob > + and gave a reason why it is 'RECOMMENDED to implement both > sending and receiving of the AccECN' > o §2.5 > <https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-ietf-tcpm-accurate-ecn#section-2.5> > Generic (Dumb) Reflector > + Emphasized handshake reflection here is an example, not > normative > o §3.2.2.3 > <https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-ietf-tcpm-accurate-ecn#section-3.2.2.3> > If either Data Sender detects IP/ECN Mangling during handshake: > + Advised not to send ECT packets but still respond to > congestion f/b > (was MUST NOT and MUST) > + Added "MUST remain in AccECN mode", in case that was not clear > o If Data Sender detects continuous congestion f/b: > + Advised not to send ECT packets and not to respond to > congestion f/b > (was SHOULD NOT and SHOULD NOT) > + Added "MUST remain in AccECN mode", in case that was not clear > o §3.2.2.4 > <https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-ietf-tcpm-accurate-ecn#section-3.2.2.4> > If Data Sender detects zeroing of ACE field after handshake > + Advised not to respond to congestion f/b > * Technical Changes: > o None > * Editorial Changes: > o Throughout: reworded lower-case normative words and minor edits > > > > Bob > > > -- > ________________________________________________________________ > Bob Briscoehttp://bobbriscoe.net/ -- ________________________________________________________________ Bob Briscoehttp://bobbriscoe.net/
- [tcpm] Summary of updates in draft-ietf-tcpm-accu… Bob Briscoe
- Re: [tcpm] Summary of updates in draft-ietf-tcpm-… Bob Briscoe