Re: [tcpm] Erik Kline's Yes on draft-ietf-tcpm-rfc793bis-25: (with COMMENT)

Benjamin Kaduk <kaduk@mit.edu> Thu, 30 September 2021 21:38 UTC

Return-Path: <kaduk@mit.edu>
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 1980A3A0A2C; Thu, 30 Sep 2021 14:38:18 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.498
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.498 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, KHOP_HELO_FCRDNS=0.399, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_NONE=0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=no 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 73mtrKh0Sql1; Thu, 30 Sep 2021 14:38:13 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from outgoing.mit.edu (outgoing-auth-1.mit.edu [18.9.28.11]) (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 E79503A14C6; Thu, 30 Sep 2021 14:38:12 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from kduck.mit.edu ([24.16.140.251]) (authenticated bits=56) (User authenticated as kaduk@ATHENA.MIT.EDU) by outgoing.mit.edu (8.14.7/8.12.4) with ESMTP id 18ULc48t011846 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT); Thu, 30 Sep 2021 17:38:09 -0400
Date: Thu, 30 Sep 2021 14:38:04 -0700
From: Benjamin Kaduk <kaduk@mit.edu>
To: "touch@strayalpha.com" <touch@strayalpha.com>
Cc: Erik Kline <ek.ietf@gmail.com>, draft-ietf-tcpm-rfc793bis@ietf.org, tcpm <tcpm@ietf.org>, The IESG <iesg@ietf.org>, tcpm-chairs@ietf.org
Message-ID: <20210930213804.GS98042@kduck.mit.edu>
References: <163210010379.32567.16863104514639344723@ietfa.amsl.com> <20210930195539.GP98042@kduck.mit.edu> <CAMGpriWUETX3n0djTSOfmbhCa72GFZ50LCCd-AvpX+EjygxqLA@mail.gmail.com> <F7BFC832-DFC7-41DA-A75A-CCAB073F74FC@strayalpha.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
In-Reply-To: <F7BFC832-DFC7-41DA-A75A-CCAB073F74FC@strayalpha.com>
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/tcpm/NgbwePk9V_LO8R7OGtolmZUeu64>
Subject: Re: [tcpm] Erik Kline's Yes on draft-ietf-tcpm-rfc793bis-25: (with COMMENT)
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: Thu, 30 Sep 2021 21:38:18 -0000

Probably worth checking, yes.  I thought there was some text that implied
"not part of the byte stream" already, but couldn't point to if offhand.

-Ben

On Thu, Sep 30, 2021 at 01:56:27PM -0700, touch@strayalpha.com wrote:
> PS - should we also note what should happen with that data, i.e., until it is defined in some other way?
> 
> I.e., SHOULD allow RST to include data, but this data is NOT part of the TCP byte stream.
> —
> Joe Touch, temporal epistemologist
> www.strayalpha.com
> 
> > On Sep 30, 2021, at 1:12 PM, Erik Kline <ek.ietf@gmail.com> wrote:
> > 
> > On Thu, Sep 30, 2021 at 12:55 PM Benjamin Kaduk <kaduk@mit.edu <mailto:kaduk@mit.edu>> wrote:
> > On Sun, Sep 19, 2021 at 06:08:23PM -0700, Erik Kline via Datatracker wrote:
> > [...]
> > > [S3.5, question]
> > > 
> > > * Is there an example of what possible use a RST w/ data could serve?
> > > 
> > >   I didn't see anything in S3.10.7(.*) that indicated the data in a segment
> > >   with the RST flag set could get processed (I may have missed it).
> > 
> > Section 4.2.2.12 of RFC 1122 (sorry, the section link doesn't work, though
> > https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc1122.html#page-87 <https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc1122.html#page-87> gets most of the way
> > there) has:
> > 
> >             A TCP SHOULD allow a received RST segment to include data.
> > 
> >             DISCUSSION
> >                  It has been suggested that a RST segment could contain
> >                  ASCII text that encoded and explained the cause of the
> >                  RST.  No standard has yet been established for such
> >                  data.
> > 
> > 
> > Ah, so including such text in 3.10.7.* would have elevated some discussion to a level not (yet) warranted.  Makes sense, thank you.
> > 
> > I look forward to the forthcoming Proposed Standard for TCP RSTs containing XML-encoded documents of error explainer text.  :D
> > _______________________________________________
> > tcpm mailing list
> > tcpm@ietf.org
> > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tcpm
>