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

"Black, David" <David.Black@dell.com> Tue, 05 November 2019 05:29 UTC

Return-Path: <David.Black@dell.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 8D20E120096; Mon, 4 Nov 2019 21:29:43 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.699
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.699 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=dell.com header.b=ZV4OIin7; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=dell.onmicrosoft.com header.b=apYGfnHF
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 Aa9AnXAfwslq; Mon, 4 Nov 2019 21:29:40 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mx0b-00154904.pphosted.com (mx0b-00154904.pphosted.com [148.163.137.20]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id BA06F120046; Mon, 4 Nov 2019 21:29:40 -0800 (PST)
Received: from pps.filterd (m0170396.ppops.net [127.0.0.1]) by mx0b-00154904.pphosted.com (8.16.0.42/8.16.0.42) with SMTP id xA55KJGt013913; Tue, 5 Nov 2019 00:29:30 -0500
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=dell.com; h=from : to : cc : subject : date : message-id : references : in-reply-to : content-type : content-transfer-encoding : mime-version; s=smtpout1; bh=nkB488e1Kn9W/OxhWQT3Cs+vgyU4QlVXLI46jbKsp3k=; b=ZV4OIin7BLrNYfZLmxt6WUFYO3ogRS7ODyXVm3CVCHfuPaOVpEEw0v4GY8Rk7NaNE5LT yzb80jUeM3+zm4klzQ2JtSaBo9S+0kt+CW3hVk3nuFQO+EevdHG1yZ76Vdn1nmaZrOuS +JHk6AVTI22yIoF5/6F/rKnKMiHFnDJbtarjUuAJMX25arQ1u7Xr9EefoVDpJTUQf7eJ XPnaONRYzp1xuJ9TvM8cXKzbQ4+8Mtwp5QH6JyD6CRLX/FgFESKHyzyFbDpvuhYU6uQO mO3rkFLgNsH8FK7eT7rvss364Ds0xEnfLtojvgHU6o5CFClW1NuadJ67iG+Zb4+wiAmb Lg==
Received: from mx0b-00154901.pphosted.com (mx0b-00154901.pphosted.com [67.231.157.37]) by mx0b-00154904.pphosted.com with ESMTP id 2w15mxu9hc-1 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT); Tue, 05 Nov 2019 00:29:30 -0500
Received: from pps.filterd (m0134318.ppops.net [127.0.0.1]) by mx0a-00154901.pphosted.com (8.16.0.42/8.16.0.42) with SMTP id xA55RmRh089229; Tue, 5 Nov 2019 00:29:29 -0500
Received: from nam04-bn3-obe.outbound.protection.outlook.com (mail-bn3nam04lp2054.outbound.protection.outlook.com [104.47.46.54]) by mx0a-00154901.pphosted.com with ESMTP id 2w14ee1j8n-1 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-SHA384 bits=256 verify=OK); Tue, 05 Nov 2019 00:29:29 -0500
ARC-Seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; s=arcselector9901; d=microsoft.com; cv=none; b=a8TttT9lnzLm3JQhekH+nVsmL3J2Cws38ANiH74wEm+pGRBjoC6htJe2rmuvdCOgsyJsGPlCGFvNlMbE6pL4IogCtBqkxZg44KS/vKp0HZXhaMB+pejcHM5SynVEA5/MyEd9mhg3H2t5tQd2ICXtsWPhBxezzTfeFlebKaOACnxfSGnDoy9MN2zlQzXHUAXv9TmcRRxYcSEb5XWtUPC59ggwtD+DF45qThswWYieMEM7HUlTInaHOoMFbnJdVhd6Qm+vIbu72Wq/3XnbB7hFyBF0MfxDMhA8cbpa/xsLGbFFqazDHL9bAf/tSl0vtjOM56qqGmuedmIkVnRVe46lGQ==
ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=microsoft.com; s=arcselector9901; h=From:Date:Subject:Message-ID:Content-Type:MIME-Version:X-MS-Exchange-SenderADCheck; bh=nkB488e1Kn9W/OxhWQT3Cs+vgyU4QlVXLI46jbKsp3k=; b=ErdFizyqZMaM9RwOE7iF4FryWm9qHq6i5KnsVUSuQnqFL7BbiwZ1IhR0Wy1wXGfWY4y++Re9o+9HJpULiorQ5n2be0iPKfIah3OnQJ8RYex4X/Qn932E2dXAtBZ4vjMXQvmL+1PVeZ8/EZ0EfmPWHshuBNHqsclwUYivYxxSWrkWlXhrCTB3iDLuJq3hAeV6hjkZsFFnlEKPH6GCAXnk2pO9YQ8dsieYY58t0WaJmZECymXrXlpuEMZW5i7Jk7ClgNhTDYcYszDYGTw6dgoeugXtiDtbSCfmDcBhHlxdOQXSItMjLGH4GlZOG8HPEYUGRu2KecwZx30d1ueh5/zQRA==
ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; mx.microsoft.com 1; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=dell.com; dmarc=pass action=none header.from=dell.com; dkim=pass header.d=dell.com; arc=none
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=Dell.onmicrosoft.com; s=selector2-Dell-onmicrosoft-com; h=From:Date:Subject:Message-ID:Content-Type:MIME-Version:X-MS-Exchange-SenderADCheck; bh=nkB488e1Kn9W/OxhWQT3Cs+vgyU4QlVXLI46jbKsp3k=; b=apYGfnHFg1nTKE6jFNcfnHZy7GQCbQqLIl4c03QObRARvbR0CR/op2GP4126fCPRaYQ9vdOzl0yF2n2R34RCErRM0GKS6GpH96ANzYuNmsGVn2ow8Jb225uoa9N8F29+BI9W72IdVTUZIeGM2w/j89Yxh/Hgdrmnv2dvFAw7800=
Received: from MN2PR19MB4045.namprd19.prod.outlook.com (10.186.145.137) by MN2PR19MB3247.namprd19.prod.outlook.com (20.179.149.149) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384) id 15.20.2408.24; Tue, 5 Nov 2019 05:29:28 +0000
Received: from MN2PR19MB4045.namprd19.prod.outlook.com ([fe80::8893:d435:ce32:3594]) by MN2PR19MB4045.namprd19.prod.outlook.com ([fe80::8893:d435:ce32:3594%6]) with mapi id 15.20.2408.024; Tue, 5 Nov 2019 05:29:28 +0000
From: "Black, David" <David.Black@dell.com>
To: Loganaden Velvindron <loganaden@gmail.com>, "Rodney W. Grimes" <4bone@gndrsh.dnsmgr.net>
CC: "gorry@erg.abdn.ac.uk" <gorry@erg.abdn.ac.uk>, "Rodney W. Grimes" <freebsd@gndrsh.dnsmgr.net>, "tcpm@ietf.org" <tcpm@ietf.org>, "tsvwg@ietf.org" <tsvwg@ietf.org>, "Black, David" <David.Black@dell.com>
Thread-Topic: [tsvwg] [tcpm] New Version Notification for draft-grimes-tcpm-tcpsce-00.txt
Thread-Index: AQHVk5Nf68SHYnnnQEWcyP/pIXUm8qd8Cxbg
Date: Tue, 5 Nov 2019 05:29:28 +0000
Message-ID: <MN2PR19MB4045BDF12038D47A11BCC702837E0@MN2PR19MB4045.namprd19.prod.outlook.com>
References: <5DBFDF26.5080101@erg.abdn.ac.uk> <201911041658.xA4GwckY001605@gndrsh.dnsmgr.net> <CAOp4FwRuh9y3A6aOo_yC_hbP1EUHwtMjmNF4j8zVNWezRTaDoQ@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CAOp4FwRuh9y3A6aOo_yC_hbP1EUHwtMjmNF4j8zVNWezRTaDoQ@mail.gmail.com>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
msip_labels: MSIP_Label_17cb76b2-10b8-4fe1-93d4-2202842406cd_Enabled=True; MSIP_Label_17cb76b2-10b8-4fe1-93d4-2202842406cd_SiteId=945c199a-83a2-4e80-9f8c-5a91be5752dd; MSIP_Label_17cb76b2-10b8-4fe1-93d4-2202842406cd_Owner=david.black@emc.com; MSIP_Label_17cb76b2-10b8-4fe1-93d4-2202842406cd_SetDate=2019-11-05T05:29:26.3784065Z; MSIP_Label_17cb76b2-10b8-4fe1-93d4-2202842406cd_Name=External Public; MSIP_Label_17cb76b2-10b8-4fe1-93d4-2202842406cd_Application=Microsoft Azure Information Protection; MSIP_Label_17cb76b2-10b8-4fe1-93d4-2202842406cd_Extended_MSFT_Method=Manual; aiplabel=External Public
x-originating-ip: [107.1.229.98]
x-ms-publictraffictype: Email
x-ms-office365-filtering-correlation-id: 888098d9-1fac-45a0-0647-08d761b120d6
x-ms-traffictypediagnostic: MN2PR19MB3247:
x-ms-exchange-purlcount: 1
x-ms-exchange-transport-forked: True
x-microsoft-antispam-prvs: <MN2PR19MB324724818D627F79999B4E07837E0@MN2PR19MB3247.namprd19.prod.outlook.com>
x-exotenant: 2khUwGVqB6N9v58KS13ncyUmMJd8q4
x-ms-oob-tlc-oobclassifiers: OLM:10000;
x-forefront-prvs: 0212BDE3BE
x-forefront-antispam-report: SFV:NSPM; SFS:(10009020)(376002)(346002)(396003)(39860400002)(136003)(366004)(13464003)(199004)(189003)(7502003)(6506007)(110136005)(966005)(52536014)(9686003)(6306002)(66446008)(107886003)(4326008)(71200400001)(86362001)(71190400001)(6246003)(64756008)(66556008)(66476007)(76116006)(66946007)(54906003)(6436002)(478600001)(256004)(14444005)(66574012)(55016002)(66066001)(2906002)(15650500001)(476003)(305945005)(25786009)(74316002)(186003)(7696005)(76176011)(786003)(316002)(81166006)(81156014)(99286004)(486006)(33656002)(11346002)(14454004)(446003)(7736002)(229853002)(3846002)(5660300002)(6116002)(53546011)(102836004)(8936002)(8676002)(26005); DIR:OUT; SFP:1101; SCL:1; SRVR:MN2PR19MB3247; H:MN2PR19MB4045.namprd19.prod.outlook.com; FPR:; SPF:None; LANG:en; PTR:InfoNoRecords; A:1; MX:1;
received-spf: None (protection.outlook.com: dell.com does not designate permitted sender hosts)
x-ms-exchange-senderadcheck: 1
x-microsoft-antispam: BCL:0;
x-microsoft-antispam-message-info: pK7ODOz0zboV84EsnnXgHGxLu2UsnxDunDHkdWbx38AciVZs4W42shbD+jMZEY5izpblT5NF29p/P7juC2BMV/GTWI8dlaKia/4gbYtaEn0cJyeRuz/Qu2cpFTcM3fOkve4t2S/9bNzOThXB34afeHNaVqTCjSmxX/i5p+58/ey21q8hmAt0Aw1DC85mUeyb1YgCbBMYpfw7Kbuzeqi8BIyYLUZgPFfjQ3dl6d0PetnGZMvQ3rkdiGWQPW+XyzI0am2n+e2NgtzKKG2uwkQOO5au6V5C/GnTWUjfShZICNXV3MQlQ3QBIk1YCdQvzGD8hvPpP93oYKe8isiMQIlQGIWsPl91jDMd70b2SAT9pQongb+fSWqgECi7VlBv/eswUv9wuVztS/ZWCpaxaWrXUhubv4BDAWhVw8MAmfIO6hztBcr0lVLbLsYTqeHZIcsXvpub56L5qzblDPGTdTG0vUZwF/My1259P2ydYtSp4eE=
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-OriginatorOrg: Dell.com
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-Network-Message-Id: 888098d9-1fac-45a0-0647-08d761b120d6
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-originalarrivaltime: 05 Nov 2019 05:29:28.2455 (UTC)
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-fromentityheader: Hosted
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-id: 945c199a-83a2-4e80-9f8c-5a91be5752dd
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-mailboxtype: HOSTED
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-userprincipalname: wdKiVCASo65VKGUuR4aD1BgY8YtaouaJFdOvjSmaS3fKIFpOk/wIdEmpMv8ppRjbBA6C4ThCBRU2mFtKJxsxSg==
X-MS-Exchange-Transport-CrossTenantHeadersStamped: MN2PR19MB3247
X-Proofpoint-Virus-Version: vendor=fsecure engine=2.50.10434:6.0.95,1.0.8 definitions=2019-11-05_01:2019-11-04,2019-11-05 signatures=0
X-Proofpoint-Spam-Details: rule=outbound_notspam policy=outbound score=0 mlxscore=0 phishscore=0 priorityscore=1501 mlxlogscore=999 adultscore=0 impostorscore=0 suspectscore=0 lowpriorityscore=0 bulkscore=0 spamscore=0 malwarescore=0 clxscore=1011 classifier=spam adjust=0 reason=mlx scancount=1 engine=8.12.0-1908290000 definitions=main-1911050042
X-Proofpoint-Spam-Details: rule=notspam policy=default score=0 malwarescore=0 adultscore=0 spamscore=0 clxscore=1015 priorityscore=1501 mlxscore=0 bulkscore=0 phishscore=0 mlxlogscore=999 suspectscore=0 impostorscore=0 lowpriorityscore=0 classifier=spam adjust=0 reason=mlx scancount=1 engine=8.12.0-1908290000 definitions=main-1911050041
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/tcpm/_rk9iSGLVfFNy-CBGvHWuQXaXAM>
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: Tue, 05 Nov 2019 05:29:45 -0000

This appears to be a tempest in a teapot, as I see the following text in Section 5 (TCP Sender) of the -01 version of this draft:

   There are no changes to the response functions with respect to CE or
   packet loss specificed by this draft, hence [RFC3168] and [RFC8511]
   are still applicable

The neutral "still applicable" language nicely sidesteps the Experimental status of RFC 8511 - in particular, if RFC 8511 is replaced by a standards-track RFC in the future, the above language has the desired effect, whereas language that explicitly referred to the Experimental status of RFC 8511 could be problematic in that scenario.

Thanks, --David (as an individual, not as a TSVWG chair)

> -----Original Message-----
> From: tsvwg <tsvwg-bounces@ietf.org>; On Behalf Of Loganaden Velvindron
> Sent: Monday, November 4, 2019 11:41 PM
> To: Rodney W. Grimes
> Cc: gorry@erg.abdn.ac.uk; Rodney W. Grimes; tcpm@ietf.org; tsvwg@ietf.org
> Subject: Re: [tsvwg] [tcpm] New Version Notification for draft-grimes-tcpm-
> tcpsce-00.txt
> 
> 
> [EXTERNAL EMAIL]
> 
> On Mon, Nov 4, 2019 at 8:59 PM Rodney W. Grimes
> <4bone@gndrsh.dnsmgr.net>; wrote:
> >
> > > On 03/11/2019, 13:08, Jonathan Morton wrote:
> > > >> 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
> > > RFC3168 describes both endpoint behaviour and network functions. To me,
> > > this sentence is about
> > > how you receive indications of incipent congestion, the sender can
> > > change from using only CE to using CE plus
> > > the accurate information -or fall back to using just CE - ultimately it
> > > falls back to just detecting congestion (loss,delay).
> > > So yes, the CE signal could be regarded as input to SCE.
> > >
> > > The endpoint behaviour, I think, should fall back to RFC8511.
> >
> > The response to CE of an SCE capable end-point is unaltered by
> > the fact that SCE is in use.  If RFC8511 is enabled on the
> > end node the response shall be that of the ABE parameters, if
> > RC8511 is not enabled then the response should be that of RFC3168.
> >
> > IE, the 2 experiments co-exist without any special considerations,
> > and SCE plays nicely with either response to CE.
> >
> > Explicitly stating in this draft that behavior should fall-back
> > to RFC8511 would complicate implementation details as then an
> > implementor may be required to implement RFC8511 if it did not
> > exist, and also to some how "know" that a connection was SCE
> > capable, somethng a sender is unaware of until the first ESCE
> > mark is recieved, and something that can change as paths over
> > the internet change during the life of the connection.
> >
> > Further more stating RFC8511 as a fallback position would more
> > or less mandate that RFC8511 be used if SCE is used, something
> > that may not be desireable.
> 
> I agree with Rod here.
> >
> > In summary.  tcpsce does not alter CE generation, feedback or
> > response, leaving all existing RFC's intact as they are written
> > with respect to the CE and ECE bits.  Tcpsce does not alter the
> > response to loss either.  This is by design.
> >
> > > Gorry
> > --
> > Rod Grimes                                                 rgrimes@freebsd.org
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > tcpm mailing list
> > tcpm@ietf.org
> > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tcpm