IETF Logo Mail Archive

[tcpm] 1323 & TCP MSS in Appendix A

David Borman <david.borman@windriver.com> Fri, 15 February 2008 22:15 UTC

Return-Path: <tcpm-bounces@ietf.org>
X-Original-To: ietfarch-tcpm-archive@core3.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ietfarch-tcpm-archive@core3.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5BEA728C5C1; Fri, 15 Feb 2008 14:15:16 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.018
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.018 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-1.581, BAYES_00=-2.599, FH_RELAY_NODNS=1.451, HELO_MISMATCH_ORG=0.611, RDNS_NONE=0.1]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 2U47oZe01QIj; Fri, 15 Feb 2008 14:15:16 -0800 (PST)
Received: from core3.amsl.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C54E928C300; Fri, 15 Feb 2008 14:15:09 -0800 (PST)
X-Original-To: tcpm@core3.amsl.com
Delivered-To: tcpm@core3.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3D3783A68CB for <tcpm@core3.amsl.com>; Fri, 15 Feb 2008 14:15:08 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id ueGkbhlxY5a0 for <tcpm@core3.amsl.com>; Fri, 15 Feb 2008 14:15:07 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail.wrs.com (mail.windriver.com [147.11.1.11]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7BB863A6B4C for <tcpm@ietf.org>; Fri, 15 Feb 2008 14:15:04 -0800 (PST)
Received: from ALA-MAIL03.corp.ad.wrs.com (ala-mail03 [147.11.57.144]) by mail.wrs.com (8.13.6/8.13.6) with ESMTP id m1FMGNEk026214 for <tcpm@ietf.org>; Fri, 15 Feb 2008 14:16:23 -0800 (PST)
Received: from ala-mail06.corp.ad.wrs.com ([147.11.57.147]) by ALA-MAIL03.corp.ad.wrs.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.1830); Fri, 15 Feb 2008 14:16:23 -0800
Received: from [172.25.34.25] ([172.25.34.25]) by ala-mail06.corp.ad.wrs.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.1830); Fri, 15 Feb 2008 14:16:24 -0800
Message-Id: <25C477DF-381D-46E7-BF8F-05461B3FCC56@windriver.com>
From: David Borman <david.borman@windriver.com>
To: tcpm@ietf.org
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v919.2)
Date: Fri, 15 Feb 2008 16:16:22 -0600
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.919.2)
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 15 Feb 2008 22:16:24.0343 (UTC) FILETIME=[66A54270:01C87020]
Subject: [tcpm] 1323 & TCP MSS in Appendix A
X-BeenThere: tcpm@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
List-Id: TCP Maintenance and Minor Extensions Working Group <tcpm.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tcpm>, <mailto:tcpm-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Post: <mailto:tcpm@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:tcpm-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tcpm>, <mailto:tcpm-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: tcpm-bounces@ietf.org
Errors-To: tcpm-bounces@ietf.org

Hi,

In Chicago we discussed moving the description of the TCP MSS option  
out of Appendix A and into a separate document.  I don't recall coming  
to a decision, I think we were going to take it to the mailing list.   
So, here's the question:

Should I take the description of the TCP MSS option out of Appendix A  
and put it into a separate draft, or should we just leave it in the  
revision for 1323?

I believe the argument for moving it out into a separate document was  
that this is an important point the implementors continue to get  
wrong, so pulling it out into a separate document will bring more  
visibility.

My personal opinion is that not that strong, I'd be fine with leaving  
it in 1323.bis, and also fine with moving it to its own draft document.

			-David Borman

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

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email