Re: [tcpm] Linux doesn’t implement RFC3465

Vidhi Goel <vidhi_goel@apple.com> Thu, 12 August 2021 18:44 UTC

Return-Path: <vidhi_goel@apple.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 7CF553A45FA for <tcpm@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 12 Aug 2021 11:44:48 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.553
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.553 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIMWL_WL_HIGH=-0.452, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H2=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=unavailable autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=apple.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 g2L_CSQPA7-Y for <tcpm@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 12 Aug 2021 11:44:44 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ma1-aaemail-dr-lapp03.apple.com (ma1-aaemail-dr-lapp03.apple.com [17.171.2.72]) (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 2FAE23A45FC for <tcpm@ietf.org>; Thu, 12 Aug 2021 11:44:44 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from pps.filterd (ma1-aaemail-dr-lapp03.apple.com [127.0.0.1]) by ma1-aaemail-dr-lapp03.apple.com (8.16.0.42/8.16.0.42) with SMTP id 17CIcMPe012452; Thu, 12 Aug 2021 11:44:36 -0700
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=apple.com; h=from : message-id : content-type : mime-version : subject : date : in-reply-to : cc : to : references; s=20180706; bh=AJVHEMFCSt/dRwsjEhlhx3NY+5pzlg6HBeIiiOxkc3I=; b=whZhxxy3Fazhy1+8VXFwrNRhPVchrSV5DKKuHZ+bKU+/gzxceO9fe3p9B+PmQoAFsFHj VU6mZ4wBVKCSbQSev2Hx6VdmRDyNNEh2SLznjvtiJqS1OKUw74leqyGkx8hZ49RzeNJ0 Ox2xWc6DYRv7M+4d5Kt7TG6UKdxfn8xgyiNY5559JYn7jrvvMpqkScFGy9FPwkdZuCS0 HNwFP32qeRvrDe6Sq5AT4X0u0GSVMRcc3SyKQUgP1kmXXKsmEEV8SbQnVcrbF0a0Co93 Ie8dBuYNRfKfeD221ogI0JVGubNy5p4RgJULA1oIk4DObWWbYORjxjXYvFNCpZXGu2Zm PA==
Received: from rn-mailsvcp-mta-lapp01.rno.apple.com (rn-mailsvcp-mta-lapp01.rno.apple.com [10.225.203.149]) by ma1-aaemail-dr-lapp03.apple.com with ESMTP id 3a9s5wvv76-6 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128 verify=NO); Thu, 12 Aug 2021 11:44:36 -0700
Received: from rn-mailsvcp-mmp-lapp02.rno.apple.com (rn-mailsvcp-mmp-lapp02.rno.apple.com [17.179.253.15]) by rn-mailsvcp-mta-lapp01.rno.apple.com (Oracle Communications Messaging Server 8.1.0.9.20210415 64bit (built Apr 15 2021)) with ESMTPS id <0QXQ00142PEBKGC0@rn-mailsvcp-mta-lapp01.rno.apple.com>; Thu, 12 Aug 2021 11:44:35 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from process_milters-daemon.rn-mailsvcp-mmp-lapp02.rno.apple.com by rn-mailsvcp-mmp-lapp02.rno.apple.com (Oracle Communications Messaging Server 8.1.0.9.20210415 64bit (built Apr 15 2021)) id <0QXQ00K00P2TDE00@rn-mailsvcp-mmp-lapp02.rno.apple.com>; Thu, 12 Aug 2021 11:44:35 -0700 (PDT)
X-Va-A:
X-Va-T-CD: 8d45deca0a60b8e84b634a23cb93b003
X-Va-E-CD: 8ad83cf34a8c3732cb73dea81270d36d
X-Va-R-CD: 2eec4d4b333905bf2498bde820845c7b
X-Va-CD: 0
X-Va-ID: 566adc51-a99a-4c0b-8671-e0e2aa8c2de3
X-V-A:
X-V-T-CD: 8d45deca0a60b8e84b634a23cb93b003
X-V-E-CD: 8ad83cf34a8c3732cb73dea81270d36d
X-V-R-CD: 2eec4d4b333905bf2498bde820845c7b
X-V-CD: 0
X-V-ID: 8232465e-5e87-45ac-99e8-ebc3af6b3551
X-Proofpoint-Virus-Version: vendor=fsecure engine=2.50.10434:6.0.391, 18.0.790 definitions=2021-08-12_06:2021-08-12, 2021-08-12 signatures=0
Received: from smtpclient.apple (unknown [17.234.111.4]) by rn-mailsvcp-mmp-lapp02.rno.apple.com (Oracle Communications Messaging Server 8.1.0.9.20210415 64bit (built Apr 15 2021)) with ESMTPSA id <0QXQ000NCPEATU00@rn-mailsvcp-mmp-lapp02.rno.apple.com>; Thu, 12 Aug 2021 11:44:34 -0700 (PDT)
From: Vidhi Goel <vidhi_goel@apple.com>
Message-id: <409938D1-CF12-4238-8641-C24C173B2E33@apple.com>
Content-type: multipart/signed; boundary="Apple-Mail=_CFF5B9CD-6B9F-45A7-BF49-5E8A92EA617C"; protocol="application/pkcs7-signature"; micalg=sha-256
MIME-version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 14.0 \(3654.100.0.2.11\))
Date: Thu, 12 Aug 2021 11:44:34 -0700
In-reply-to: <CAM4esxSNwhZc3VWwh7gjZb+G=4N8pfCpZa1aKzsMf7PF+ZEB3A@mail.gmail.com>
Cc: Yuchung Cheng <ycheng=40google.com@dmarc.ietf.org>, Neal Cardwell <ncardwell@google.com>, Mirja Kuehlewind <mirja.kuehlewind=40ericsson.com@dmarc.ietf.org>, Extensions <tcpm@ietf.org>, Mark Allman <mallman@icir.org>
To: Martin Duke <martin.h.duke@gmail.com>
References: <78EF3761-7CAF-459E-A4C0-57CDEAFEA8EE@apple.com> <CADVnQynkBxTdapXN0rWOuWO3KXQ2qb6x=xhB35XrMU38JkX2DQ@mail.gmail.com> <601D9D4F-A82C-475A-98CC-383C1F876C44@apple.com> <54699CC9-C8F5-4CA3-8815-F7A21AE10429@icsi.berkeley.edu> <DF5EF1C7-0940-478A-9518-62185A79A288@apple.com> <E150D881-4AB3-4AEA-BE0C-1D4B47B2C531@icir.org> <CADVnQynjE+D-OSvdOVROjT3y1cnHHWqdNQSmphLAJ+HsBTUAJQ@mail.gmail.com> <A1B50403-2405-4348-9626-025D255DEAE7@icir.org> <CADVnQykM8p-bVz_oPrje1yNh9_7_isAUL+wnQWDoY9Gs18sLPQ@mail.gmail.com> <11FE4818-87E7-4FD8-8F45-E19CD9A3366A@apple.com> <CAK6E8=fFWAE_NSr45i2mdh6NmYDusUFW3GYGtuo-FcL07sox9A@mail.gmail.com> <D6B865F7-9865-4B6F-986B-F44ABE5F12B0@apple.com> <756432D9-4331-454D-82EB-346CF54A355E@icir.org> <CAK6E8=c+KeQxWJq0e98hY9XsQ2vhdr3SiKkypC7kwdZbBRgdXA@mail.gmail.com> <A39F73BE-4BF1-479D-911F-0CAC6D91D924@icir.org> <CAK6E8=eEnVtMNBpu0noFAud4BTWdupCH+QY1beFjTtD9ADkK5g@mail.gmail.com> <CADVnQynWSCpEBeEtHL0JHCBYwyymX0vku_VbfeDQ_snUoCX=ZA@mail.gmail.com> <76891287-22E6-4071-87C4-8F3A1FD3C2D1@apple.com> <CADVnQy=6XE7mFZRdBar3YXjUMc5URJYcsJvNdUGy26Zz7gajKQ@mail.gmail.com> <1EC4E6CF-604B-411E-BF68-3EF695DB22B5@icir.org> <CAK6E8=eO5=YfVVhMu54Af1K6sb4iXbykON-Zo8__pWfqG3Vk_w@mail.gmail.com> <4A5AA064-CAC9-4319-8E42-463B3E1FAA1E@ericsson.com> <CAM4esxQOp5+_G4xBeCvSbVCQVSKM1n4atZUJzrWrTqXdS8BA4Q@mail.gmail.com> <44490F18-FFB0-4E13-BB97-0FF642B67171@apple.com> <CAM4esxSNwhZc3VWwh7gjZb+G=4N8pfCpZa1aKzsMf7PF+ZEB3A@mail.gmail.com>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3654.100.0.2.11)
X-Proofpoint-Virus-Version: vendor=fsecure engine=2.50.10434:6.0.391, 18.0.790 definitions=2021-08-12_06:2021-08-12, 2021-08-12 signatures=0
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/tcpm/bmAz0C6MUNTa6do_JdNh5P3NmkA>
Subject: Re: [tcpm] =?utf-8?q?Linux_doesn=E2=80=99t_implement_RFC3465?=
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: Thu, 12 Aug 2021 18:44:49 -0000

> On Thu, Aug 12, 2021 at 11:34 AM Vidhi Goel <vidhi_goel@apple.com <mailto:vidhi_goel@apple.com>> wrote:
>> 2. If there is no such energy, or there are contentious issues that will draw out the process to get this to RFC, than I can initiate a review of upgrading 3465 to PS directly. I think we all agree this would be an improvement on the status quo, but isn't worth doing if 3465bis is going to happen quickly.
> 
> I don’t think 3465 can be upgraded to PS as-is.
> 
> Why not?

Because L=2 as MUST is too constrained for high BDPs and most stacks don’t even follow that.


> On Aug 12, 2021, at 11:39 AM, Martin Duke <martin.h.duke@gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> 
> 
> On Thu, Aug 12, 2021 at 11:34 AM Vidhi Goel <vidhi_goel@apple.com <mailto:vidhi_goel@apple.com>> wrote:
>> 2. If there is no such energy, or there are contentious issues that will draw out the process to get this to RFC, than I can initiate a review of upgrading 3465 to PS directly. I think we all agree this would be an improvement on the status quo, but isn't worth doing if 3465bis is going to happen quickly.
> 
> I don’t think 3465 can be upgraded to PS as-is.
> 
> Why not?
>  
> Personally, I like the structure of 6928 more than 3465. Is it possible to rope in ABC (3465) in a 6928bis and 
> change the title - Would like to hear more from the authors of both the RFCs.
> 
> It will take a bit more editorial work, but there's no reason a single document can't obsolete both RFCs.
>  
> 
> Thanks,
> Vidhi
> 
> Thanks for writing a draft. That will move things along.
>  
>