IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [tcpm] intended status of draft-ietf-tcpm-accurate-ecn

Bob Briscoe <in@bobbriscoe.net> Thu, 27 February 2020 09:16 UTC

Return-Path: <in@bobbriscoe.net>
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 ECF4C3A161D; Thu, 27 Feb 2020 01:16:39 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.098
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.098 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, 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=bobbriscoe.net
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 A4cS-1p1tJQC; Thu, 27 Feb 2020 01:16:38 -0800 (PST)
Received: from server.dnsblock1.com (server.dnsblock1.com [85.13.236.178]) (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 23A193A161E; Thu, 27 Feb 2020 01:16:38 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=bobbriscoe.net; s=default; h=Content-Type:In-Reply-To:MIME-Version:Date: Message-ID:From:References:Cc:To:Subject: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=tlpx5lznfdK1KXG9MO/+T7nHZErfTxEtVLF1ykuVFCA=; b=VxMnCifVULIAKwQ/dzmAZ5WFe eN4cy5YuCSZY/gu3r8RrikRABGoFc0xJiQjzQGqwMtE0g1rmx5RhoN79/zGYzJJRfebCng/dobx5O 47ABftx/GpjQwZk6daGZ4YMkRCVuEm5no2XldWorQovIQ6pFSbGKZfo+5+pI2BABKmcNL2bOMlwhi 8Lb5aOzzkLWwaGabwrJQVChpN3ifOJkaVkLgtpR4kuoE06CeKg1HT35qAXwNK/WVmGtVc3x15Eq04 HvuHRDepdPIVWQuR+7rvlW9XihdPbkRp8HUNsmzPTR8hCybpqSRnrDp4lb6N2rFBW1V8oOD4Jz3SC z91d6t5xg==;
Received: from [31.185.128.125] (port=45668 helo=[192.168.0.6]) by server.dnsblock1.com with esmtpsa (TLSv1.2:ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256:128) (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from <in@bobbriscoe.net>) id 1j7FHX-0003nU-Vz; Thu, 27 Feb 2020 09:16:36 +0000
To: Yoshifumi Nishida <nsd.ietf@gmail.com>, "tcpm@ietf.org Extensions" <tcpm@ietf.org>
Cc: tcpm-chairs@ietf.org
References: <CAAK044Qxf+ap=rPhuh8BxzS38woLHNqms_S--Eo348Fd4D+yuQ@mail.gmail.com> <CAAK044Q1++XTfmBY7bGzbDzgfVLCR0qq7JsAogfOrjVPd0ZiUw@mail.gmail.com>
From: Bob Briscoe <in@bobbriscoe.net>
Message-ID: <60ce5dd7-d5b7-0878-18da-ddcce48c9561@bobbriscoe.net>
Date: Thu, 27 Feb 2020 09:16:34 +0000
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:60.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/60.6.1
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <CAAK044Q1++XTfmBY7bGzbDzgfVLCR0qq7JsAogfOrjVPd0ZiUw@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="------------32BB910A9A35ADBB47106790"
Content-Language: en-GB
X-AntiAbuse: This header was added to track abuse, please include it with any abuse report
X-AntiAbuse: Primary Hostname - server.dnsblock1.com
X-AntiAbuse: Original Domain - ietf.org
X-AntiAbuse: Originator/Caller UID/GID - [47 12] / [47 12]
X-AntiAbuse: Sender Address Domain - bobbriscoe.net
X-Get-Message-Sender-Via: server.dnsblock1.com: authenticated_id: in@bobbriscoe.net
X-Authenticated-Sender: server.dnsblock1.com: in@bobbriscoe.net
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/tcpm/enLYTgYeZsFWwJkciQSqE5K9pr8>
Subject: Re: [tcpm] intended status of draft-ietf-tcpm-accurate-ecn
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, 27 Feb 2020 09:16:40 -0000

Yoshi, all,

I am preparing a revision (...-10) with all the recent queued up changes 
except those needed to change from EXP to PS. Then I shall follow that 
with a second revision (...-11) for the change from EXP to PS.

Reason: To enable implementers to separate out changes in the diffs 
resulting from IETF procedure.


Bob

On 24/01/2020 08:06, Yoshifumi Nishida wrote:
> Hi everyone,
>
> Sorry for taking long time. After several discussions among the 
> chairs, we've concluded the rough consensus of the WG is that this 
> document should target PS..
>
> As tcpm is a relatively small community, it's sometimes not easy to 
> assess the consensus in the group.
> However, as far as we've checked, most of people don't have issues on 
> publishing it as a PS doc.
>
> This will mean the updated version of this draft will require further 
> detailed reviews since the current version was written for an 
> experimental doc. This might take extra time compared to publishing an 
> EXP draft.
> In addition, there are possibilities that other ECN proposals will be 
> published in the future (and they can be PS as well). This draft 
> should be carefully reviewed not to prevent such activities.
>
> Thanks,
> --
> Yoshi on behalf of tcpm co-chairs
>
>
> On Fri, Dec 13, 2019 at 1:17 AM Yoshifumi Nishida <nsd.ietf@gmail.com 
> <mailto:nsd.ietf@gmail.com>> wrote:
>
>     Hi folks,
>
>     We would like to get feedback for the intended status
>     of draft-ietf-tcpm-accurate-ecn.
>     The current intended status of this draft is experimental, but
>     we've seen some voices that PS is more preferable for the draft
>     during Singapore meeting and on the ML. So, we would like to check
>     the consensus on it.
>
>     There are some on-going related discussions such as flag
>     registration policy, SCE, ECN++, etc, however, we believe the
>     intended status discussions is independent from them and can
>     proceed it separately.. (If you have concerns on it, please share
>     your opinion here)
>
>     We appreciate your feedback.
>
>     Thanks,
>     --
>     Yoshi on behalf of tcpm co-chairs.
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> tcpm mailing list
> tcpm@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tcpm

-- 
________________________________________________________________
Bob Briscoe                               http://bobbriscoe.net/

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email