Re: [tcpm] [tsvwg] New Version Notification for draft-grimes-tcpm-tcpsce-00.txt

Jonathan Morton <chromatix99@gmail.com> Sun, 03 November 2019 13:09 UTC

Return-Path: <chromatix99@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 6B0F51200A4; Sun, 3 Nov 2019 05:09:00 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.749
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.749 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_ENVFROM_END_DIGIT=0.25, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=no autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com
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 ZcKF2L6tgijy; Sun, 3 Nov 2019 05:08:59 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail-lj1-x233.google.com (mail-lj1-x233.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4864:20::233]) (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 04EA4120089; Sun, 3 Nov 2019 05:08:58 -0800 (PST)
Received: by mail-lj1-x233.google.com with SMTP id t5so14744138ljk.0; Sun, 03 Nov 2019 05:08:58 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:subject:from:in-reply-to:date:cc :content-transfer-encoding:message-id:references:to; bh=LpFMRNBBKU8Fj85yU+5j/qqNn9lT6iLz0kpFi8ylyDg=; b=YMuM5/XllR1aEO6eXhVNIJR65/AolRv31NMn893q8zuw/p/t6SdZ6oFc2lJldWpmZE 479XZbiwtVLMcvuptjK5fK0FlFpV8gSsuhQsT1byBi0Adbmk0m6hbl5qpPMtdnLv7vGP JaigPEUYCG+avaR5gd0PzZMxI3ksaHZq6ZS0hQ36HHpoRxpZJLh0inxYkpT8RcpUzN68 3F49k5JKqASjj6Uml7faafxj0ca3g1MI4qS30ujNCYd5fSFM/6frugvHYJ9u2lM6W5K3 kRjNCPmA97JeBj6wWB+ZALErPTEr31zSZdSGH+P/uokeOUdQvt87c7OCe6WR9z3LEZo/ tsGw==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:subject:from:in-reply-to:date:cc :content-transfer-encoding:message-id:references:to; bh=LpFMRNBBKU8Fj85yU+5j/qqNn9lT6iLz0kpFi8ylyDg=; b=q0JToX7MYvwworo/W+O2FN6ljgBbmV1CnEicFHCAQR0U08De8RnVXyUP/IciAVB81M FmzzaEfemfu0nwzBuNCEFE7J7TFEYHomVwp7tU9uE190C81KJMf28+L25yR6fhnQs+FW o97QgnUsc9MuhcPZnWBJW5eShVR2fGCCLt+Rvx2HEaaSNTQM5IVh68g1l+0OFrlszAYo Lwf50rY8ry62iFUQXhPJeQk/7wiY3KKk+xCA3P0EEpmPemikJv9POtnerwyrOu0WAYx4 lcPKkken9TnRX/O4hMV7I7FYSnI8umZ4QxKiiJ/QTP1Thpck/iumxxfY0MB+e/2oXSe9 XGdA==
X-Gm-Message-State: APjAAAU6ky1zxXWDg4+BO/bBqaXVdhfByEAka/J2v2em8Y7+C42uDBl+ c4ne2jo/Zcmg6tTEb1OjNPptT+xt
X-Google-Smtp-Source: APXvYqxe4F4pN1YSHqmz55gFGe20119vgL08al9jv0ZHSfuHbCsExWX/vQ7rFN8oG5vBOHGRsmVCrw==
X-Received: by 2002:a2e:9802:: with SMTP id a2mr2687944ljj.254.1572786537172; Sun, 03 Nov 2019 05:08:57 -0800 (PST)
Received: from jonathartonsmbp.lan (85-76-23-24-nat.elisa-mobile.fi. [85.76.23.24]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id z20sm5967424ljj.85.2019.11.03.05.08.55 (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Sun, 03 Nov 2019 05:08:56 -0800 (PST)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 11.5 \(3445.9.1\))
From: Jonathan Morton <chromatix99@gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <5DBEA1E3.9020009@erg.abdn.ac.uk>
Date: Sun, 3 Nov 2019 15:08:54 +0200
Cc: "Rodney W. Grimes" <4bone@gndrsh.dnsmgr.net>, "Rodney W. Grimes" <freebsd@gndrsh.dnsmgr.net>, "tcpm@ietf.org" <tcpm@ietf.org>, "tsvwg@ietf.org" <tsvwg@ietf.org>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-Id: <66994B86-4EEA-45BC-80FA-31F1EF8EFE96@gmail.com>
References: <201911022326.xA2NQIYm093618@gndrsh.dnsmgr.net> <5DBEA1E3.9020009@erg.abdn.ac.uk>
To: gorry@erg.abdn.ac.uk
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3445.9.1)
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/tcpm/YJlI8UZEge3x3aKuvOI8fpZSp6o>
Subject: Re: [tcpm] [tsvwg] New Version Notification for draft-grimes-tcpm-tcpsce-00.txt
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: Sun, 03 Nov 2019 13:09:00 -0000

> On 3 Nov, 2019, at 11:46 am, Gorry Fairhurst <gorry@erg.abdn.ac.uk>; wrote:
> 
>> With respect to draft-ietf-tcpm-accurate-ecn and
>> draft-grimes-tcpm-tcpsce compatibility:
>>   When accurate ecn (AccECN) fails to negotiate an AccECN capable session
>>   it falls back to RFC3168 conformance, leaving a state that is fully
>>   compatible with SCE, hence they are compatible.

> I was expecting this to fall-back to RFC8511, treatment at the endpointrs, since that is the most recent spec. Does that make any difference to your thoughts abiout what you expect an endpoint to do when it receives ECN-marking without Accurate ECN?

RFC-8511 doesn't change the signalling on the wire relative to RFC-3168.  That was the sense intended here.

 - Jonathan Morton