IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [tcpm] [EXTERNAL] Re: On Sender Control of Delayed Acks in TCP

Carles Gomez Montenegro <carlesgo@entel.upc.edu> Thu, 18 June 2020 08:29 UTC

Return-Path: <carlesgo@entel.upc.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 729183A0FB8; Thu, 18 Jun 2020 01:29:11 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.895
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.895 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H4=0.001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_NONE=0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] 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 uELmrmlM9GuW; Thu, 18 Jun 2020 01:29:10 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from violet.upc.es (violet.upc.es [147.83.2.51]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 595973A0FB6; Thu, 18 Jun 2020 01:29:05 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from entelserver.upc.edu (entelserver.upc.es [147.83.39.4]) by violet.upc.es (8.14.4/8.14.4/Debian-4.1ubuntu1) with ESMTP id 05I8T0C8034945; Thu, 18 Jun 2020 10:29:00 +0200
Received: from webmail.entel.upc.edu (webmail.entel.upc.edu [147.83.39.6]) by entelserver.upc.edu (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4620A1D53C1; Thu, 18 Jun 2020 10:28:59 +0200 (CEST)
Received: from 79.152.3.25 by webmail.entel.upc.edu with HTTP; Thu, 18 Jun 2020 10:29:00 +0200
Message-ID: <d22d5a180187a4ec445c6d42cec5012e.squirrel@webmail.entel.upc.edu>
In-Reply-To: <4B1DC848-32F1-4BAF-9835-CC931C1F938C@strayalpha.com>
References: <683902e8-a2af-cfb7-ffd0-c5c5742e5bd5@gmx.at> <CADVnQykY3OqXy=RcEfa-OpfK2x=W5_FTrdrx7PvKuqgEt92uNw@mail.gmail.com> <7d145f1203f6344b92f6f8aa11a78239.squirrel@webmail.entel.upc.edu> <CADVnQy=wPUx62y7VNqjSPP+snKX4vVvK5q=qqYb1j+0nGrtezQ@mail.gmail.com> <c6da08f4-03d7-da46-26b1-168f5953329f@bobbriscoe.net> <909de4172e46712f543f723d0ae2d638.squirrel@webmail.entel.upc.edu> <CADVnQynE3EMh-9qX7TkxifNvaKke7=PpWW2nB3Z6t1q7CYQXbg@mail.gmail.com> <9B5D12AC-248F-4E61-B6C5-1DA9529C7A42@lurchi.franken.de> <CADVnQy=gGzsvG2F935bM7wqGbbSZi+A5E=vxkpz=Bwc+ab2rkg@mail.gmail.com> <CAH56bmBNxknNvgOFajYJ-FuVXNU=Ra43UKyp-AEgD4m_p070pQ@mail.gmail.com> <BN3PR00MB01169B7713BDF863903AC6C8B6BE0@BN3PR00MB0116.namprd00.prod.outlook.com> <92538abd26cf9394cfc3e4b8f08a1f7e.squirrel@webmail.entel.upc.edu> <4B1DC848-32F1-4BAF-9835-CC931C1F938C@strayalpha.com>
Date: Thu, 18 Jun 2020 10:29:00 +0200
From: Carles Gomez Montenegro <carlesgo@entel.upc.edu>
To: Joseph Touch <touch@strayalpha.com>
Cc: Praveen Balasubramanian <pravb=40microsoft.com@dmarc.ietf.org>, Neal Cardwell <ncardwell=40google.com@dmarc.ietf.org>, Matt Mathis <mattmathis=40google.com@dmarc.ietf.org>, "tcpm@ietf.org" <tcpm@ietf.org>, Jon Crowcroft <jon.crowcroft@cl.cam.ac.uk>, Michael Tuexen <michael.tuexen@lurchi.franken.de>
User-Agent: SquirrelMail/1.4.21-1.fc14
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-Priority: 3 (Normal)
Importance: Normal
X-Virus-Scanned: clamav-milter 0.100.3 at violet
X-Virus-Status: Clean
X-Greylist: ACL matched, not delayed by milter-greylist-4.3.9 (violet.upc.es [147.83.2.51]); Thu, 18 Jun 2020 10:29:01 +0200 (CEST)
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/tcpm/WKeN9FavG5vvrzJ5vOvEztaofzE>
Subject: Re: [tcpm] [EXTERNAL] Re: On Sender Control of Delayed Acks in TCP
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, 18 Jun 2020 08:29:11 -0000

Hi Joe,

First of all, sorry for the late reply.

Please find below my inline response.

>> On May 13, 2020, at 5:00 AM, Carles Gomez Montenegro
>> <carlesgo@entel.upc.edu> wrote:
>>
>> In this thread, several WG participants expressed a positive opinion
>> about
>> defining a new TCP option. (Although, as you mentioned, this approach
>> also
>> has drawbacks.)
>
> Why not start as defining an Experimental Option (with a corresponding
> code point)?
>
> Joe

Thanks for your suggestion.

(I understand that you mean an Experimental-category specification
defining a TCP Option using a dedicated kind number different from 253 or
254.)

Yes, this sounds as a very good approach!

Cheers,

Carles

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email