[tcpm] Re: posted draft-ietf-tcpm-prr-rfc6937bis-13
Yoshifumi Nishida <nsd.ietf@gmail.com> Sun, 10 November 2024 12:00 UTC
Return-Path: <nsd.ietf@gmail.com>
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 3F70AC14F689 for <tcpm@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sun, 10 Nov 2024 04:00:02 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.103
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.103 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, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_BLOCKED=0.001, RCVD_IN_ZEN_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_SCC_BODY_TEXT_LINE=-0.01, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001, URIBL_DBL_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001, URIBL_ZEN_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001] autolearn=unavailable autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([50.223.129.194]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id jBFEkHksxhj3 for <tcpm@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sun, 10 Nov 2024 03:59:57 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail-qv1-xf36.google.com (mail-qv1-xf36.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::f36]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 (128/128 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature ECDSA (P-256) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id EB1C2C14F602 for <tcpm@ietf.org>; Sun, 10 Nov 2024 03:59:57 -0800 (PST)
Received: by mail-qv1-xf36.google.com with SMTP id 6a1803df08f44-6cbce8d830dso25974586d6.1 for <tcpm@ietf.org>; Sun, 10 Nov 2024 03:59:57 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20230601; t=1731239996; x=1731844796; darn=ietf.org; h=cc:to:subject:message-id:date:from:in-reply-to:references :mime-version:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=st2OgfocCnVyGtsfB0it1Y2uW29UP4vtpCFFX6uQcKI=; b=GF6c08MQ5gc9jXLOth0gaAZZFmhI9tHZ1ncds5HGmpxDgcHUHmqzEGv2+sNMlYCbbD lGtYpIppg6I2P0cDnMzoSp4tzhsEdtkVhOBTPVFaAY25e59tNayA5qlpiEz3eSKzUi2p VrpHGZEYs3DZ50wyzVMt98AcQMwa6dp8qzTF0O9SclO8aBaIKmf0Obj6nPBEWgleuwr5 rM5rc5cNW15cM0hgool0AAmHH4TkAPFS9uz5h72eJihtDevgIdb6YGQb2WoBvsULjYLA d1QClq9PSc6j6Am3J3BVU8kSEUsBPrJE9A8ZhUk4yysJ2UbMyCK0+fBZ532XVeO8s9R5 eZbw==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20230601; t=1731239996; x=1731844796; h=cc:to:subject:message-id:date:from:in-reply-to:references :mime-version:x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id :reply-to; bh=st2OgfocCnVyGtsfB0it1Y2uW29UP4vtpCFFX6uQcKI=; b=puBFeyTIUvfBJYiDLbaE1qY/zWR0DpHIuzBzEMCrcaLsmd7g/eOsye1NbbAkywmyT5 2fKQWUfALHMKCHq7Vc2GAxocRlECfywLr66Tvv0CyRiEukr5RspW6bo31QOIgMpM31cv fzgjv/kJhpCb7rxi6e4M64ARvcPDkET2qZWnTkEnVZS4F1DznuQVSjS5khrJ01C+jnrE KBr38zCw5Fp6Jco2zZKz05MgQGekeWWKjZ6pzY7wGzQRmQpLc3MqpNyR1HoxHoldkY3E NkVyqSbAvhgJOach5TQ1OSveFLLOZ3ewXVIh0EVNDIgPg2rbqag73y3Pl8tcXCM9DEvR GOtg==
X-Gm-Message-State: AOJu0Yx2GFyooRIDj9HlVkdIk9FnsElAbi4I7bvn4YR14J3DmYW/NSIA 90Sl6GCmpl6ju3gbgr2X9BZ0ekGfT0SzcuTEMpQKYTuJsXh0ogLD5tenElTzNL6VZNFfieWqe0J RPZZDKgYVVsBsC3BJb/vu+5V79fjjaA==
X-Google-Smtp-Source: AGHT+IFSEJIS7wtQaoyMVOUFk5zFaKEVOVJYERmdWoI4unrEuctG/T/VUy+RxW9rNNgQvlCfvKmmuBCzaUupaS7ueN8=
X-Received: by 2002:a05:6214:498e:b0:6cb:e7eb:fcf0 with SMTP id 6a1803df08f44-6d39e1a5315mr135909056d6.33.1731239996484; Sun, 10 Nov 2024 03:59:56 -0800 (PST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <173118614268.485878.6458219729346150755@dt-datatracker-5f77bcf4bd-4q5pd> <CADVnQyn=HcxWdQ_1K0MZ9jJzFcgiaGS1L-kgW0c9bZGs13TL4w@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CADVnQyn=HcxWdQ_1K0MZ9jJzFcgiaGS1L-kgW0c9bZGs13TL4w@mail.gmail.com>
From: Yoshifumi Nishida <nsd.ietf@gmail.com>
Date: Sun, 10 Nov 2024 03:59:45 -0800
Message-ID: <CAAK044TV5-_pQ6An08i=XTbNXb9JZXBDA0bOv6CxiwEPxAO4GA@mail.gmail.com>
To: Neal Cardwell <ncardwell=40google.com@dmarc.ietf.org>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="00000000000002f8bd06268db933"
Message-ID-Hash: GKWTFLD57DNQC7DBVI2UIEZVU244VPUV
X-Message-ID-Hash: GKWTFLD57DNQC7DBVI2UIEZVU244VPUV
X-MailFrom: nsd.ietf@gmail.com
X-Mailman-Rule-Misses: dmarc-mitigation; no-senders; approved; emergency; loop; banned-address; member-moderation; header-match-tcpm.ietf.org-0; nonmember-moderation; administrivia; implicit-dest; max-recipients; max-size; news-moderation; no-subject; digests; suspicious-header
CC: tcpm <tcpm@ietf.org>
X-Mailman-Version: 3.3.9rc6
Precedence: list
Subject: [tcpm] Re: posted draft-ietf-tcpm-prr-rfc6937bis-13
List-Id: TCP Maintenance and Minor Extensions Working Group <tcpm.ietf.org>
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/tcpm/Vpaa3_Cax6cJIzJzE6QPME8xNrs>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/tcpm>
List-Help: <mailto:tcpm-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Owner: <mailto:tcpm-owner@ietf.org>
List-Post: <mailto:tcpm@ietf.org>
List-Subscribe: <mailto:tcpm-join@ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:tcpm-leave@ietf.org>
Hi Neal, thank you so much! The chairs believe these two are the last points to conclude the discussion of the draft. We are planning to submit the draft to IESG once we settle them. -- Yoshi On Sat, Nov 9, 2024 at 1:12 PM Neal Cardwell <ncardwell= 40google.com@dmarc.ietf.org> wrote: > Hi TCPM-ers, > > We have posted rev 13 of rfc6937bis (see links below). We made a pass > to try to make sure the draft addresses "open issue 1" and "open issue > 2" discussed this past week at IETF 121, in the meeting and the slides > ( slides: > https://datatracker.ietf.org/meeting/121/materials/slides-121-tcpm-prr-00 > ). > > Here's how we handled those: > > (1) open issue 1: When ssthresh is reduced and PRR is triggered. It > turns out this was already integrated back in July. See the changes to > Sec 6, "Algorithm" in revision 9; here's the diff: > > https://author-tools.ietf.org/iddiff?url1=draft-ietf-tcpm-prr-rfc6937bis-08&url2=draft-ietf-tcpm-prr-rfc6937bis-09&difftype=--html > > (2) open issue 2: Using "inflight" rather than "pipe": that's the > primary change in rev 13; here's the diff: > > https://author-tools.ietf.org/iddiff?url2=draft-ietf-tcpm-prr-rfc6937bis-13 > > As always, feedback is welcome! > > best regards, > neal > > > ---------- Forwarded message --------- > From: <internet-drafts@ietf.org> > Date: Sat, Nov 9, 2024 at 4:02 PM > Subject: New Version Notification for draft-ietf-tcpm-prr-rfc6937bis-13.txt > To: Matt Mathis <ietf@mattmathis.net>, Nandita Dukkipati > <nanditad@google.com>, Neal Cardwell <ncardwell@google.com>, Yuchung > Cheng <ycheng@google.com> > > > A new version of Internet-Draft draft-ietf-tcpm-prr-rfc6937bis-13.txt has > been > successfully submitted by Neal Cardwell and posted to the > IETF repository. > > Name: draft-ietf-tcpm-prr-rfc6937bis > Revision: 13 > Title: Proportional Rate Reduction for TCP > Date: 2024-11-09 > Group: tcpm > Pages: 21 > URL: > https://www.ietf.org/archive/id/draft-ietf-tcpm-prr-rfc6937bis-13.txt > Status: https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-tcpm-prr-rfc6937bis/ > HTML: > https://www.ietf.org/archive/id/draft-ietf-tcpm-prr-rfc6937bis-13.html > HTMLized: > https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-ietf-tcpm-prr-rfc6937bis > Diff: > https://author-tools.ietf.org/iddiff?url2=draft-ietf-tcpm-prr-rfc6937bis-13 > > Abstract: > > This document updates the experimental Proportional Rate Reduction > (PRR) algorithm, described RFC 6937, to standards track. PRR > provides logic to regulate the amount of data sent by TCP or other > transport protocols during fast recovery. PRR accurately regulates > the actual flight size through recovery such that at the end of > recovery it will be as close as possible to the slow start threshold > (ssthresh), as determined by the congestion control algorithm. > > > > The IETF Secretariat > > _______________________________________________ > tcpm mailing list -- tcpm@ietf.org > To unsubscribe send an email to tcpm-leave@ietf.org >
- [tcpm] posted draft-ietf-tcpm-prr-rfc6937bis-13 Neal Cardwell
- [tcpm] Re: posted draft-ietf-tcpm-prr-rfc6937bis-… Yoshifumi Nishida