Re: [tcpm] TCP EDO and SYN-EXT-OPT finalization - request for discussion Wed, 13 October 2021 09:07 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id 49C653A117A for <>; Wed, 13 Oct 2021 02:07:36 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.099
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.099 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, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H2=-0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, UNPARSEABLE_RELAY=0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key)
Received: from ([]) by localhost ( []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id mS1MuBELAxfQ for <>; Wed, 13 Oct 2021 02:07:31 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ( []) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by (Postfix) with ESMTPS id BCBB43A115D for <>; Wed, 13 Oct 2021 02:07:29 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from (unknown [xx.xx.xx.65]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by (ESMTP service) with ESMTPS id 4HTmrb392cz1ybN; Wed, 13 Oct 2021 11:07:27 +0200 (CEST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;; s=ORANGE001; t=1634116047; bh=Weyb1/6oqUKeo82XQ2+6BsJHbVOuF0i/tcBgshqLU08=; h=From:To:Subject:Date:Message-ID:Content-Type: Content-Transfer-Encoding:MIME-Version; b=TC8inBdmtY41dBjChjW4sRB4Orc4khcyRMv6inwQqXxIl0voWlbNnTT7e0kUtB1x4 pTIHwD1KaX7RyCcCHL/xVah39rpLUsTxDxsyUF8KzBLipKkgKvuqo/MHLN1G9IWCkV X2bOwH482p+5xS4xnDqubLaES6wfl+geVAp2FkWcJXRvgPMh8Ggp1EjHW6IH3OQ0Yo IDi43gmMBrHRyZcF1QdZXNriq+A4EPzdSiAzWm3K0C8lK738HV0f5Uts7JkkDx2uMd Xvz3X81/yDHj+Gs9HV8F79Ha65kv6Q5viBROT5fAbi1bSBZ1+jxSSgK9JlYPx3zLAp 1v5vfFf8DDWcA==
Received: from Exchangemail-eme6.itn.ftgroup (unknown [xx.xx.13.48]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by (ESMTP service) with ESMTPS id 4HTmrb2Bz0zDq7l; Wed, 13 Oct 2021 11:07:27 +0200 (CEST)
To: Wesley Eddy <>, "" <>, tcpm <>
Thread-Topic: [tcpm] TCP EDO and SYN-EXT-OPT finalization - request for discussion
Thread-Index: AQHXv6Juf3wMc6cQW0G5Axj3X/vkf6vPqLmAgADmNgA=
Date: Wed, 13 Oct 2021 09:07:25 +0000
Message-ID: <23584_1634116047_6166A1CF_23584_209_1_787AE7BB302AE849A7480A190F8B93303542B124@OPEXCAUBMA2.corporate.adroot.infra.ftgroup>
References: <> <>
In-Reply-To: <>
Accept-Language: fr-FR, en-US
Content-Language: fr-FR
msip_labels: MSIP_Label_07222825-62ea-40f3-96b5-5375c07996e2_Enabled=true; MSIP_Label_07222825-62ea-40f3-96b5-5375c07996e2_SetDate=2021-10-13T07:51:25Z; MSIP_Label_07222825-62ea-40f3-96b5-5375c07996e2_Method=Privileged; MSIP_Label_07222825-62ea-40f3-96b5-5375c07996e2_Name=unrestricted_parent.2; MSIP_Label_07222825-62ea-40f3-96b5-5375c07996e2_SiteId=90c7a20a-f34b-40bf-bc48-b9253b6f5d20; MSIP_Label_07222825-62ea-40f3-96b5-5375c07996e2_ActionId=8590e339-fd3a-4d85-a6e4-c08962074eaa; MSIP_Label_07222825-62ea-40f3-96b5-5375c07996e2_ContentBits=0
x-originating-ip: []
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64
MIME-Version: 1.0
Archived-At: <>
Subject: Re: [tcpm] TCP EDO and SYN-EXT-OPT finalization - request for discussion
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: TCP Maintenance and Minor Extensions Working Group <>
List-Unsubscribe: <>, <>
List-Archive: <>
List-Post: <>
List-Help: <>
List-Subscribe: <>, <>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 13 Oct 2021 09:07:37 -0000

Hi all, 

I agree with Wes. 

Solving the SYN case is more problematic (e.g., consider an application relying upon MP_CAPABLE + FAST_OPEN). We managed to solve this specific issue in RFC8803 without requiring SYN-EOS/OOB, but that approach cannot be generalized. Having a tcpm WG document to cover the SYN case + discuss the issues of an OOB mechanism is useful.    


> -----Message d'origine-----
> De : tcpm <> De la part de Wesley Eddy
> Envoyé : mardi 12 octobre 2021 22:07
> À :; tcpm <>
> Objet : Re: [tcpm] TCP EDO and SYN-EXT-OPT finalization - request for
> discussion
> On 10/12/2021 3:50 PM, wrote:
> >
> > - are there any open issues or pending suggestions to TCP EDO to
> > prepare it for last call?
> >
> I think it's in good shape for a last call.  It's stable and addresses all
> of the feedback to date, aside from greater implementation and field
> experience.  At the moment, it seems like QUIC has solved the burning need
> we had for TCP options space, by attracting all the work that would
> normally need more options. However, after many years of discussion about
> how to handle this for TCP, and many candidates, the EDO approach was the
> one the working group was able to get consensus around, and we really
> should wrap up and publish it, IMHO.
> > - would the WG like to adopt SYN-EXT-OPT as experimental as well or
> > would it be preferred (and OK) to submit this as
> > individual/experimental if not?
> >
> Either approach is fine with me, and I prefer either of them rather than
> not advancing anything.  I would be willing to contribute reviews for
> either path.
> _______________________________________________
> tcpm mailing list


Ce message et ses pieces jointes peuvent contenir des informations confidentielles ou privilegiees et ne doivent donc
pas etre diffuses, exploites ou copies sans autorisation. Si vous avez recu ce message par erreur, veuillez le signaler
a l'expediteur et le detruire ainsi que les pieces jointes. Les messages electroniques etant susceptibles d'alteration,
Orange decline toute responsabilite si ce message a ete altere, deforme ou falsifie. Merci.

This message and its attachments may contain confidential or privileged information that may be protected by law;
they should not be distributed, used or copied without authorisation.
If you have received this email in error, please notify the sender and delete this message and its attachments.
As emails may be altered, Orange is not liable for messages that have been modified, changed or falsified.
Thank you.