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.
- [tcpm] rfc5961 and suggested updates. Loganaden Velvindron
- Re: [tcpm] rfc5961 and suggested updates. Mirja Kühlewind
- Re: [tcpm] rfc5961 and suggested updates. Loganaden Velvindron
- Re: [tcpm] rfc5961 and suggested updates. Loganaden Velvindron
- Re: [tcpm] rfc5961 and suggested updates. Loganaden Velvindron
- Re: [tcpm] rfc5961 and suggested updates. Joe Touch
- Re: [tcpm] rfc5961 and suggested updates. Neal Cardwell
- Re: [tcpm] rfc5961 and suggested updates. Yoshifumi Nishida
- Re: [tcpm] rfc5961 and suggested updates. Joe Touch
- Re: [tcpm] rfc5961 and suggested updates. Joe Touch
- Re: [tcpm] rfc5961 and suggested updates. Smith, Donald
- Re: [tcpm] rfc5961 and suggested updates. Yoshifumi Nishida
- Re: [tcpm] rfc5961 and suggested updates. Yoshifumi Nishida