Re: [tcpm] On allocating reserved bits in the TCP header

Joe Touch <touch@strayalpha.com> Wed, 11 September 2019 04:53 UTC

Return-Path: <touch@strayalpha.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 DF39E12026E for <tcpm@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 10 Sep 2019 21:53:19 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.218
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.218 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_NEUTRAL=0.779, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=no autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=strayalpha.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 XbA6cjYQ9hlt for <tcpm@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 10 Sep 2019 21:53:18 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from server217-3.web-hosting.com (server217-3.web-hosting.com [198.54.115.226]) (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 C6E59120168 for <tcpm@ietf.org>; Tue, 10 Sep 2019 21:53:18 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=strayalpha.com; s=default; h=To:References:Message-Id:Cc:Date:In-Reply-To: From:Subject:Mime-Version:Content-Type:Sender:Reply-To: Content-Transfer-Encoding:Content-ID:Content-Description:Resent-Date: Resent-From:Resent-Sender:Resent-To:Resent-Cc:Resent-Message-ID:List-Id: List-Help:List-Unsubscribe:List-Subscribe:List-Post:List-Owner:List-Archive; bh=n+2EuV2sRn49/FwzGMVF4ATeDauFcxxRFPN/2JjxKQg=; b=6ZfgS88jOHIEAzCuKKBFjwjQX NPgVRLIj2N2SDZBaXYytaUdafhdZ+xuCU6qKN3ZPbhwRzsso68Tv3qItZXnUYtF5fSOR2q4lBwfN2 peHmXoxJloj/b0rd2HKbj+qATWwyTYtRk1zk4HdINdgztdG4RMudzsM/k3AcGkqRw4YCLVhwNqynY e5cS5EEPwUgL2rDR7+sbUpPaGLsXlrZgc8NUW4TRDwo4Sa4JYB1ZRrcfq+c+kn+6cIGZO5QC1vw3E EgDDyJcRfy3MnH7Tn0p4wqfJG49cUVJJ+QdFPtOoH573UCNihWb/PQ3i8uVDJeeHih0uz0AhG1++n VSZtkmjkA==;
Received: from cpe-172-250-225-198.socal.res.rr.com ([172.250.225.198]:52494 helo=[192.168.1.10]) by server217.web-hosting.com with esmtpsa (TLSv1.2:ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384:256) (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from <touch@strayalpha.com>) id 1i7ud0-001N0G-5S; Wed, 11 Sep 2019 00:53:18 -0400
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="Apple-Mail=_C60B9E07-0248-4E87-9531-48A74622B143"
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 11.5 \(3445.9.1\))
From: Joe Touch <touch@strayalpha.com>
In-Reply-To: <6EC6417807D9754DA64F3087E2E2E03E2D437915@rznt8114.rznt.rzdir.fht-esslingen.de>
Date: Tue, 10 Sep 2019 21:53:13 -0700
Cc: "tcpm@ietf.org" <tcpm@ietf.org>
Message-Id: <BE8BB7D0-E055-4115-900B-F1179BD750FC@strayalpha.com>
References: <6EC6417807D9754DA64F3087E2E2E03E2D437915@rznt8114.rznt.rzdir.fht-esslingen.de>
To: "Scharf, Michael" <Michael.Scharf@hs-esslingen.de>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3445.9.1)
X-OutGoing-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.0
X-AntiAbuse: This header was added to track abuse, please include it with any abuse report
X-AntiAbuse: Primary Hostname - server217.web-hosting.com
X-AntiAbuse: Original Domain - ietf.org
X-AntiAbuse: Originator/Caller UID/GID - [47 12] / [47 12]
X-AntiAbuse: Sender Address Domain - strayalpha.com
X-Get-Message-Sender-Via: server217.web-hosting.com: authenticated_id: touch@strayalpha.com
X-Authenticated-Sender: server217.web-hosting.com: touch@strayalpha.com
X-Source:
X-Source-Args:
X-Source-Dir:
X-From-Rewrite: unmodified, already matched
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/tcpm/bBEIGwZgRECi4LE1YbNCki8idxw>
Subject: Re: [tcpm] On allocating reserved bits in the TCP header
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: Wed, 11 Sep 2019 04:53:20 -0000

FWIW….

> On Sep 10, 2019, at 3:50 AM, Scharf, Michael <Michael.Scharf@hs-esslingen.de> wrote:
> 
> In any case, I feel uncomfortable with creating a precedent for IETF process violation regarding any of the reserved bits in the TCP header.

This type of thing came up in some other contexts recently. IMO, if a base spec defines the bits as reserved or not assigned, then they can be overturned only by a doc at the same maturity level.

(as Michael points out, that doc itself can then downgrade the maturity level needed for subsequent assignments or uses)

Joe