Re: [tcpm] Adopting call for draft-khademi-tcpm-alternativebackoff-ecn

grenville armitage <garmitage@swin.edu.au> Wed, 11 January 2017 19:16 UTC

Return-Path: <garmitage@swin.edu.au>
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 112DE12996C for <tcpm@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 11 Jan 2017 11:16:43 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -7.399
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-7.399 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-3.199] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
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 Fz9loXH6mXYU for <tcpm@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 11 Jan 2017 11:16:41 -0800 (PST)
Received: from gpo2.cc.swin.edu.au (gpo2.cc.swin.edu.au [136.186.1.31]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 17D7F12949F for <tcpm@ietf.org>; Wed, 11 Jan 2017 11:16:40 -0800 (PST)
Received: from [136.186.229.37] (garmitage.caia.swin.edu.au [136.186.229.37]) by gpo2.cc.swin.edu.au (8.14.3/8.14.3) with ESMTP id v0BJGZYE025770 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=NO); Thu, 12 Jan 2017 06:16:35 +1100
To: tcpm@ietf.org
References: <CAO249yeDWcSc-ZPk7YeGD3_CFhxD_AT2P1+oTc3UbpBe72pEDw@mail.gmail.com> <CAO249ycgL8bBv=TaT0tC9VtCy2-cf9859KYwNZU1FgKu7SL3EQ@mail.gmail.com> <20170106211839.GA69857@verdi> <CAO249ycRW2BsvwXdDoC6jSUhVFEwAORzjJfs=CFNF-tPcnWwrw@mail.gmail.com> <20170110124204.GB10525@verdi> <CAO249ye_KyjBViX4dgKM+0A8ibHyDvpCrf+Tno6v_DyWym4CrQ@mail.gmail.com> <C7A8B357-A4FC-4509-AA94-FF0073F2BE5E@ifi.uio.no>
From: grenville armitage <garmitage@swin.edu.au>
Message-ID: <58768493.6000106@swin.edu.au>
Date: Thu, 12 Jan 2017 06:16:35 +1100
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; FreeBSD amd64; rv:38.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/38.7.1
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <C7A8B357-A4FC-4509-AA94-FF0073F2BE5E@ifi.uio.no>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"; format="flowed"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/tcpm/NVgNZErvvYAEGu4qjR_dvKKk5q4>
Subject: Re: [tcpm] Adopting call for draft-khademi-tcpm-alternativebackoff-ecn
X-BeenThere: tcpm@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17
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, 11 Jan 2017 19:16:43 -0000


On 01/12/2017 00:31, Michael Welzl wrote:
>> On 11 Jan 2017, at 09:23, Yoshifumi Nishida <nishida@sfc.wide.ad.jp> wrote:
>>
     [..]
>> I think I saw enough supports for the draft while I don't see any objections.
>> I am thinking that it can be adopted if the authors can guarantee to address these points in a new version.
> I have no problem to make that promise, I do think it's a very reasonable request
>

+1 (as another co-author)

cheers,
gja