[tcpm] Cross-area alignment on "L4S and RACK"

"Scharf, Michael" <Michael.Scharf@hs-esslingen.de> Tue, 06 November 2018 19:20 UTC

Return-Path: <Michael.Scharf@hs-esslingen.de>
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 DEA2A130DFA; Tue, 6 Nov 2018 11:20:16 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2 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_NONE=-0.0001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=hs-esslingen.de
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 oGGL2xVt7Bkw; Tue, 6 Nov 2018 11:20:14 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail.hs-esslingen.de (mail.hs-esslingen.de [134.108.32.78]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 6C38112F1A5; Tue, 6 Nov 2018 11:20:14 -0800 (PST)
Received: from localhost (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by mail.hs-esslingen.de (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5FE8E25A13; Tue, 6 Nov 2018 20:20:12 +0100 (CET)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=hs-esslingen.de; s=mail; t=1541532012; bh=TDbIhNngvyUqlEb5wit4zsPRa5CKnlgR7mDtCU1fYmg=; h=From:To:CC:Subject:Date:From; b=qIW8Wz50kDlylVapmSzbldZj/I6faJ4/TJkOQb9kM1pTrZivZtGfONvDOh/PmCTkE 3KPpqedF66Bj5Yi3jn/A9Ob4MB4Deh6Az3Nndi2l6ookLUHbmzSEQoC/jK2kjyHNh+ Uwrihb/0q/sMwRT5x5XcRyLgZBvagFCcc5Iz+WUM=
X-Virus-Scanned: by amavisd-new-2.7.1 (20120429) (Debian) at hs-esslingen.de
Received: from mail.hs-esslingen.de ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (hs-esslingen.de [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id qaXdl1a43LQ3; Tue, 6 Nov 2018 20:20:12 +0100 (CET)
Received: from rznt8101.rznt.rzdir.fht-esslingen.de (rznt8101.hs-esslingen.de [134.108.29.101]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail.hs-esslingen.de (Postfix) with ESMTPS; Tue, 6 Nov 2018 20:20:12 +0100 (CET)
Received: from RZNT8114.rznt.rzdir.fht-esslingen.de ([169.254.3.25]) by rznt8101.rznt.rzdir.fht-esslingen.de ([fe80::bd73:d6a9:24d7:95f1%10]) with mapi id 14.03.0415.000; Tue, 6 Nov 2018 20:20:11 +0100
From: "Scharf, Michael" <Michael.Scharf@hs-esslingen.de>
To: "tcpm@ietf.org" <tcpm@ietf.org>
CC: "tsvwg@ietf.org" <tsvwg@ietf.org>
Thread-Topic: Cross-area alignment on "L4S and RACK"
Thread-Index: AdR2Bb4d1a0DCDIIR0elSSOg03+wFg==
Date: Tue, 6 Nov 2018 19:20:11 +0000
Message-ID: <6EC6417807D9754DA64F3087E2E2E03E2D14F3F0@rznt8114.rznt.rzdir.fht-esslingen.de>
Accept-Language: de-DE, en-US
Content-Language: de-DE
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
x-originating-ip: [134.108.29.249]
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
MIME-Version: 1.0
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/tcpm/iazqH_PBln7TBthyub79InZGV7A>
Subject: [tcpm] Cross-area alignment on "L4S and RACK"
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, 06 Nov 2018 19:20:17 -0000

A comment on the TCPM presentation "L4S and RACK":

As far as I understand, the DETNET WG in RTG area has quite some uses cases for ultra-low latency transport - in particular also with bounded jitter. And some of these applications (e.g. using UDP) apparently may not be able to tolerate *any* out-of-order packet delivery.

So perhaps some cross-area alignment on ulta-low-latency application requirements would be useful?

Michael
(who recently had to review draft-ietf-detnet-architecture)