Re: [tcpm] rfc5961 and suggested updates.

Loganaden Velvindron <loganaden@gmail.com> Tue, 02 October 2018 10:23 UTC

Return-Path: <loganaden@gmail.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 B5DDF130DD6 for <tcpm@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 2 Oct 2018 03:23:05 -0700 (PDT)
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, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.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 8pwotz1mrPau for <tcpm@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 2 Oct 2018 03:23:04 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-it1-x12e.google.com (mail-it1-x12e.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::12e]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 09D201277C8 for <tcpm@ietf.org>; Tue, 2 Oct 2018 03:23:04 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-it1-x12e.google.com with SMTP id q70-v6so2697970itb.3 for <tcpm@ietf.org>; Tue, 02 Oct 2018 03:23:03 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc:content-transfer-encoding; bh=dZPIFFeBxJr+FBNImcq4sgSAftG5AcLcVg/UNjOLVC8=; b=Zw5pLQ93B8JxfpudWpAOvEE+u8nYGVy17HZ42WNmcXWD4fs6mD8iqoehd9EqCK+hSN q++pdtzWnSqSrWOdXx9/cnYdxVCxsX+/J9+KpqxaOUOu+d26qKe7DOrgeJ3ReZZkTDQ8 6BApeeh4qP0FFi95G/hy80/1ucJJqF7ZNrPSlK7fZuC17CR5VZtRpu+wzBvMP7VlM+R6 YbPiYxfEb/ElJ8p7PfYyDftkES2s5bdVPhlf395qXxUf2NZwLS2LfEKZsurj89/Pj2vp UFQwoWkYk+l/mR41flWLxFgTdQYxJxDUogIdW9TNq1LyA+uDM3y2d3Q6oV4MydGicM37 HDlg==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc:content-transfer-encoding; bh=dZPIFFeBxJr+FBNImcq4sgSAftG5AcLcVg/UNjOLVC8=; b=dBvfOddqy/PW29c1AWfD1ppEDL9NqsVioowlHy2vkvWbOjmTSrP5jckFmDR6oPqs1s 1Q7H/KIcgMQDmielBvZ9pZ+jfCuw0pDkt7oXLzltQ7MsiD3CKOSIccgziRh2c589XzrG /DsPdNKm+szEXywF5HU40fon3FN9qeooexP2ud2zVXwA2HTpiMcVcV4cGvhvgK5wZJYT vImvYvmfizdenWkRMIX4TxkjnqUaIerZGIGDGto7L0+hk+sNUbvPbtBnCdxZLwdmnb7+ seyQuwEtBHmFY6wLZpQes8WXy0cFDDrTDJcW8kWcPVhq+cFNhjLD93sKip6785BZyMYk LdAA==
X-Gm-Message-State: ABuFfoh16dDBm8Yw1lnEDmEcpNOJtEfaDsrH7f03+DvlnWwonCiBaTe1 p0c9sogWJzwbVJC2PSuyIPs+JOijqSwpKYqauSQ=
X-Google-Smtp-Source: ACcGV6392whC6/HxZ7RSeJ8nwBoOgL2QTKTwnFQYzAzWxc1JaDvuhCAnuF1xH5rpSMYaf54EiAGIebCUNwGXr8HA2CE=
X-Received: by 2002:a02:b60d:: with SMTP id h13-v6mr11818864jam.45.1538475783338; Tue, 02 Oct 2018 03:23:03 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <CAOp4FwQqfJh6QiNbtcaH83gbZm+iPK5zpTCvje0W+Tpz+fjNng@mail.gmail.com> <DDE6A9C1-3FED-4F0A-84F1-355FA2EBFCF1@tik.ee.ethz.ch>
In-Reply-To: <DDE6A9C1-3FED-4F0A-84F1-355FA2EBFCF1@tik.ee.ethz.ch>
From: Loganaden Velvindron <loganaden@gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 2 Oct 2018 14:22:52 +0400
Message-ID: <CAOp4FwQ26SChQtPZ84aGZSYx6kfBChHkff54sqWNy4iMbeHg-Q@mail.gmail.com>
To: =?UTF-8?Q?Mirja_K=C3=BChlewind?= <mirja.kuehlewind@tik.ee.ethz.ch>
Cc: "tcpm@ietf.org Extensions" <tcpm@ietf.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/tcpm/lCxXhSWBfD16MrlheRSydae2P4c>
Subject: Re: [tcpm] rfc5961 and suggested updates.
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, 02 Oct 2018 10:23:06 -0000

On Fri, Aug 24, 2018 at 6:07 PM Mirja Kühlewind
<mirja.kuehlewind@tik.ee.ethz.ch> wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> my personal opinion:
>
> I agree that documenting the problem and recommending the implementation of per-socket limits would be a useful thing to do.
>
> I don’t think it is appropriated or needed to update or even deprecate RFC5961, therefore I would strongly support the changes to this draft as you described below.
>
> Mirja
>

Gentle reminder.