Re: [tcpm] Request for feedback on WG adoption of draft-balasubramanian-tcpm-hystartplusplus-03

"Rodney W. Grimes" <ietf@gndrsh.dnsmgr.net> Fri, 15 May 2020 02:21 UTC

Return-Path: <ietf@gndrsh.dnsmgr.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 DE18D3A044F; Thu, 14 May 2020 19:21:25 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.497
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.497 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, KHOP_HELO_FCRDNS=0.4, 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 vZJrj-ShC3tr; Thu, 14 May 2020 19:21:23 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from gndrsh.dnsmgr.net (br1.CN84in.dnsmgr.net [69.59.192.140]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 982283A044E; Thu, 14 May 2020 19:21:23 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from gndrsh.dnsmgr.net (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by gndrsh.dnsmgr.net (8.13.3/8.13.3) with ESMTP id 04F2LJWP084222; Thu, 14 May 2020 19:21:19 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from ietf@gndrsh.dnsmgr.net)
Received: (from ietf@localhost) by gndrsh.dnsmgr.net (8.13.3/8.13.3/Submit) id 04F2LIme084221; Thu, 14 May 2020 19:21:18 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from ietf)
From: "Rodney W. Grimes" <ietf@gndrsh.dnsmgr.net>
Message-Id: <202005150221.04F2LIme084221@gndrsh.dnsmgr.net>
In-Reply-To: <D963CFA8-5851-40EE-BA70-2522BB99C1C1@fh-muenster.de>
To: Michael Tuexen <tuexen@fh-muenster.de>
Date: Thu, 14 May 2020 19:21:18 -0700
CC: tcpm IETF list <tcpm@ietf.org>, draft-balasubramanian-tcpm-hystartplusplus@ietf.org
X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4ME+ PL121h (25)]
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/tcpm/TL-JokO5LIllm7vmZXelzwv8UQo>
Subject: Re: [tcpm] Request for feedback on WG adoption of draft-balasubramanian-tcpm-hystartplusplus-03
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: Fri, 15 May 2020 02:21:26 -0000

Dear tcpm'ers,
	I have read the 03 version of this draft, and support this draft
being adopted by the WG.

	I however believe this work should be consider only a starting
point for formalizing hystartplusplus, for one the description seems to
ignore ECN (RFC3168) and refers to drops or loss, though I believe the
implementation actually does react to a CE.

	I am also concerned as a "Proposed Standard" it has the text
indicated one can "experiment" with magic constants, that would be fine
for an experimental track, but I do not feel comfortable with that text
in a PS.  If these constants are not well defined perhaps this should be
an experiment.

Regards,
Rod Grimes

> Dear all,
> 
> this mail starts a WG adoption call for
> https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-balasubramanian-tcpm-hystartplusplus-03
> 
> The intended status would be PS.
> 
> So I would like to solicit feedback regarding support for or objections against the
> adoption of the document as a WG document in TCPM, if it hasn't been already sent to
> the list.
> 
> Please provide feedback before May 21st.
> 
> Best regards
> Michael

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

-- 
Rod Grimes                                                 rgrimes@freebsd.org