Re: [tcpm] Draft agenda for London

Hi Dirk,

Does Deutsche Telekom plan to deploy this option in their network? If so, could you perhaps provide details on the deployment and its use to the TCPM community (on the mailinglist)?

The TCPM community has asked explicitly which vendors and network operators would indeed use this option in products, and, for what. Without further details, I do not understand what benefit a face-to-face discussion would have.

Thanks

Michael

________________________________________
Von: Dirk.von-Hugo@telekom.de [Dirk.von-Hugo@telekom.de]
Gesendet: Freitag, 14. Februar 2014 10:45
Bis: Scharf, Michael (Michael); gorry@erg.abdn.ac.uk; ycheng@google.com
Cc: tcpm-chairs@tools.ietf.org; tcpm@ietf.org
Betreff: RE: [tcpm] Draft agenda for London

Hi all,
If that sounds like "we have time left for other discussion" I may propose to spend some time on the very recent and partially controversial opinion exchange on the host_id/NAT header modification issue described in draft-williams-exp-tcp-host-id-opt-01.txt - just to quote the most recent ML contribution to be found here: http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/tcpm/current/msg08568.html.
I am interested in the topic also because of other activities such as HIAPS https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/hiaps

What do you think?
Or have I missed something?
My 2 cents
Best regards
Dirk

-----Original Message-----
From: tcpm [mailto:tcpm-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Scharf, Michael (Michael)
Sent: Freitag, 14. Februar 2014 09:27
To: gorry@erg.abdn.ac.uk; Yuchung Cheng
Cc: tcpm-chairs@tools.ietf.org; tcpm@ietf.org Extensions
Subject: Re: [tcpm] Draft agenda for London

Very valid question. I was told that the draft will be updated.

Some background: Given some interest in MPTCP, we thought that a technical discussion on tcpcrypt could make sense. However, due to additional WG conflicts, we realized that for this we actually need a second (very short) TCPM slot. Surprisingly, we then ended up with a much longer slot than what we asked for. As a result, and as noted earlier on this list, we actually have plenty of meeting time in London - more than we asked for. Now, since there was no shortage of time, we finally decided to approve the author's request of 60 min even if it significantly exceeds what TCPM is used to grant. So far, we also approved all other presentation requests with at least the requested time. Within the usual single TCPM slot, a 60 min request would not have been approved.

Having said this, the agenda is tentative, and feedback is welcome.

Michael

________________________________________
Von: gorry@erg.abdn.ac.uk [gorry@erg.abdn.ac.uk]
Gesendet: Freitag, 14. Februar 2014 08:38
Bis: Yuchung Cheng
Cc: Scharf, Michael (Michael); tcpm-chairs@tools.ietf.org; tcpm@ietf.org Extensions
Betreff: Re: [tcpm] Draft agenda for London

I think it would be good to understand why there is a 60 minute talk on something where the text has not changed at all since the last meeting.

Gorry

> On Feb 13, 2014 1:24 AM, "Scharf, Michael (Michael)" <
> michael.scharf@alcatel-lucent.com> wrote:
>>
>> Hi all,
>>
>> Please find below the first draft for the TCPM agenda in London.
>> Since we
> received a request for an exceptionally long presentation, we decided
> to ask for a second TCPM time slot. We plan to discuss the WG drafts
> in the Thursday slot, while spending the Monday slot on individual submissions.
> Note that this is a tentative agenda and changes are still possible.
>>
>> Please let the chairs know if you have any suggestions or if we
>> missed
> something.
>>
>> Thanks
>>
>> Michael, Pasi, Yoshifumi
>>
>>
>>
>> ****** Draft Agenda ******
>>
>> TCPM meeting, IETF-89, London, UK
>>
>> Session 1: Monday, 0900-1130
>> ============================
>>
>> Individual Drafts
>> -----------------
>>
>> * Making TCP more Robust to Packet Reordering
>>   draft-zimmermann-tcpm-reordering-detection
>>   draft-zimmermann-tcpm-reordering-reaction
>>   Alexander Zimmermann
>>   30 min
>>
>> * Simpler and reordering resilient loss recovery
>>   (no draft)
>>   Yuchung Cheng
>>   20 min
>>
>> * tcpcrypt: the case for ubiquitous transport-level encryption
>>   draft-bittau-tcp-crypt
>>   Andrea Bittau
>>   60 min
> This draft was presented in Prague and Vancouver. Is this an update
> based on the feedbacks from prior meetings?
>
>
>>
>>
>> Session 2: Thursday, 1300-1500
>> ==============================
>>
>> WG Status
>> ---------
>>
>> * TCPM status
>>   Chairs
>>   10 min
>>
>> Working Group Items
>> -------------------
>>
>> * TCP Roadmap
>>   draft-ietf-tcpm-tcp-rfc4614bis
>>   Alexander Zimmermann
>>   10 min
>>
>> * Updating TCP to support Rate-Limited Traffic
>>   draft-ietf-tcpm-newcwv-05
>>   Gorry Fairhurst
>>   20 min
>>
>> * TCP and SCTP RTO Restart
>>   draft-ietf-tcpm-rtorestart-01
>>   Per Hurtig
>>   15 min
>>
>> * Problem Statement and Requirements for a More Accurate ECN Feedback
>>   draft-ietf-tcpm-accecn-reqs-05
>>   Mirja Kuehlewind
>>   5 min
>>
>>
>> Individual Drafts
>> -----------------
>>
>> * More Accurate ECN Feedback Solutions
>>   draft-kuehlewind-tcpm-accurate-ecn
>>   draft-kuehlewind-tcpm-accurate-ecn-option
>>   Richard Scheffenegger
>>   10 min
>>
>> * Timestamp negotiation and Clock exposure
>>   draft-trammell-tcpm-timestamp-interval
>>   draft-scheffenegger-tcpm-timestamp-negotiation
>>   Richard Scheffenegger
>>   15 min
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> tcpm mailing list
>> tcpm@ietf.org
>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tcpm
> _______________________________________________
> tcpm mailing list
> tcpm@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tcpm
>

_______________________________________________
tcpm mailing list
tcpm@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tcpm