IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [tcpm] draft-eggert-tcpm-historicize-00

"Anantha Ramaiah (ananth)" <ananth@cisco.com> Wed, 09 June 2010 22:59 UTC

Return-Path: <ananth@cisco.com>
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 BCCF03A68DD for <tcpm@core3.amsl.com>; Wed, 9 Jun 2010 15:59:01 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -9.995
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-9.995 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.604, BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-8]
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 oBcT91XUkAvR for <tcpm@core3.amsl.com>; Wed, 9 Jun 2010 15:59:01 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from sj-iport-1.cisco.com (sj-iport-1.cisco.com [171.71.176.70]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 27C2F3A68D5 for <tcpm@ietf.org>; Wed, 9 Jun 2010 15:59:01 -0700 (PDT)
Authentication-Results: sj-iport-1.cisco.com; dkim=neutral (message not signed) header.i=none
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: AvsEABu5D0yrRN+J/2dsb2JhbACeXHGlP5oXhRgEg0mMPQ
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.53,394,1272844800"; d="scan'208";a="333686418"
Received: from sj-core-3.cisco.com ([171.68.223.137]) by sj-iport-1.cisco.com with ESMTP; 09 Jun 2010 22:59:03 +0000
Received: from xbh-sjc-211.amer.cisco.com (xbh-sjc-211.cisco.com [171.70.151.144]) by sj-core-3.cisco.com (8.13.8/8.14.3) with ESMTP id o59Mx3TG021041; Wed, 9 Jun 2010 22:59:03 GMT
Received: from xmb-sjc-21c.amer.cisco.com ([171.70.151.176]) by xbh-sjc-211.amer.cisco.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.3959); Wed, 9 Jun 2010 15:59:02 -0700
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.5
Content-class: urn:content-classes:message
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Date: Wed, 09 Jun 2010 15:59:01 -0700
Message-ID: <0C53DCFB700D144284A584F54711EC5809E5C58B@xmb-sjc-21c.amer.cisco.com>
In-Reply-To: <4C0FDBA0.7030500@isi.edu>
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
Thread-Topic: [tcpm] draft-eggert-tcpm-historicize-00
Thread-Index: AcsIANVr/yHeQtWwTN+ABsRqntp/CAAJh25A
References: <20100609151532.8E75E28C0D0@core3.amsl.com><33D3BDE9-7E8D-4DF0-B8D5-BFFC66CF9C99@nokia.com> <20100609173556.GA5338@nuttenaction> <0C53DCFB700D144284A584F54711EC5809E5C397@xmb-sjc-21c.amer.cisco.com> <4C0FDBA0.7030500@isi.edu>
From: "Anantha Ramaiah (ananth)" <ananth@cisco.com>
To: Joe Touch <touch@isi.edu>
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 09 Jun 2010 22:59:03.0125 (UTC) FILETIME=[5ADB2850:01CB0827]
Cc: tcpm@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [tcpm] draft-eggert-tcpm-historicize-00
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: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tcpm>, <mailto:tcpm-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/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, 09 Jun 2010 22:59:01 -0000

 

> 
> The question is whether we need a "generalized" such option, 
> or whether the current alternate checksum is basically 
> sufficient, given a table of appropriate algorithms and 
> algorithm IDs. There are already 253 available ID values left ;-)

I agree, I was just stating in the context of the current proposal (Lars
draft). If what we have already accommadates this situation, then we are
good.

-Anantha

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email