Re: [tcpm] Request for feedback on WG adoption of draft-balasubramanian-tcpm-hystartplusplus-03
Mark Allman <mallman@icir.org> Fri, 15 May 2020 13:26 UTC
Return-Path: <mallman@icsi.berkeley.edu>
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 5BE6A3A09E4 for <tcpm@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 15 May 2020 06:26:30 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.648
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.648 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS=0.25, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3=0.001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=no autolearn_force=no
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 YCHrRP7qpH-b for <tcpm@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 15 May 2020 06:26:28 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-ot1-f45.google.com (mail-ot1-f45.google.com [209.85.210.45]) (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 C20DE3A09E3 for <tcpm@ietf.org>; Fri, 15 May 2020 06:26:28 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-ot1-f45.google.com with SMTP id 63so1858231oto.8 for <tcpm@ietf.org>; Fri, 15 May 2020 06:26:28 -0700 (PDT)
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:in-reply-to :references:mime-version; bh=MI064XBnP9C87oD+8b0TyKVadd8hxMZJpaTVjgQihL0=; b=r6rCzv9B7JZiKCqyC95Z+Z8iHXrBDfrKlXh/3wNqBQX+I3eud1b96lxO2GGb9gFdh/ t89iwASZNE4FHRYz0Ovi8ZJUmjXRFKkEukyJkWmJrvMVadx8PwR8IHtuXPOL/gzL+VGQ Oz11rNSDvd/K+lSKWPaoxQCpCn/nR7SJhCUgFEyq86vYp/kfm5YU2rASvfsjfUEo6tus zFdHLP3DCL3k4KBA7HyHWPcxEWeViCBmPU3V//LIZpUGJd9rYOMQp3oKMwOYcFfPUMOf aeV70zzSZHWplVQU+zFE0tJHi11WSTiI8ew2bIWHl0Kz34eEgphpl6X0jnH8eMd09I2o SEzA==
X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM533rXbkZSaNfdtryvieGr4AAj05keerNZ6v6ClDbaIvnmI0TVV+x 2UNphDrzzj0I5rjSPabC2c22rg==
X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJxKtUdaUfVkqROp356EHerPW0ewFup8ISlzGafrGKNReYtvkXYE6lRI5lGZvZhJqz7J3izdjA==
X-Received: by 2002:a9d:1d03:: with SMTP id m3mr2062863otm.353.1589549187732; Fri, 15 May 2020 06:26:27 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [192.168.1.244] ([2600:1700:b380:3f00:78:bd3e:1e27:437e]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id f14sm549882otl.62.2020.05.15.06.26.26 (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-ECDSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Fri, 15 May 2020 06:26:26 -0700 (PDT)
From: Mark Allman <mallman@icir.org>
To: Mirja Kuehlewind <mirja.kuehlewind@ericsson.com>
Cc: Neal Cardwell <ncardwell@google.com>, tcpm IETF list <tcpm@ietf.org>, Michael Tuexen <tuexen@fh-muenster.de>, draft-balasubramanian-tcpm-hystartplusplus@ietf.org
Date: Fri, 15 May 2020 09:26:25 -0400
X-Mailer: MailMate (1.13.1r5671)
Message-ID: <20DBA494-7858-4207-8E52-25D82A817B63@icir.org>
In-Reply-To: <D24BE77A-86CA-4093-B471-0F9A63FA24DD@ericsson.com>
References: <D963CFA8-5851-40EE-BA70-2522BB99C1C1@fh-muenster.de> <B581E2C0-D2EF-4AAE-951B-27A404A6427F@icir.org> <CADVnQykh+Srg++Yp2-c5yh8ikVHgBQvxDWeLpOp=7B3XV1Vz6g@mail.gmail.com> <172F0536-8FEE-4F7E-AADA-19CF30077B8F@icir.org> <D24BE77A-86CA-4093-B471-0F9A63FA24DD@ericsson.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="=_MailMate_AF5EE8AD-0D9F-45C0-876D-FECCBBE129E8_="; micalg="pgp-sha1"; protocol="application/pgp-signature"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/tcpm/nrTQiVQa0TjLkVBTzf4uVW_JTMg>
Subject: Re: [tcpm] Request for feedback on WG adoption of draft-balasubramanian-tcpm-hystartplusplus-03
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: Fri, 15 May 2020 13:26:31 -0000
> this work has been presented multiple time in tcpm which a bunch > of measurement numbers of real deployments. I really don't think > this material should end up in the draft. The draft provides the > specification of the mechanism (preferably as comprehensive and > short as possible). The IETF proceedings provide the record for > results and background information. I have never actually heard quite that framing before. I am not looking for a research paper here. But, some sketch of why this has been found to be reasonable, that the draft is just documenting existing practice, etc. would seem required to me. And, incorporating a comprehensive set of references for more and deeper information is fine. The substantive reference in this draft is from over a decade ago (yes, "the" because there is only one). I am not the sharpest knife in the drawer, but I would never think to go dig through the IETF proceedings to try to find such. Not that it might not be there, just that that would be a long slog without a reference. I also bristle somewhat at this notion that our job is just to give the "what" and not the "why". I know we are much better at the former. And, I know I have been guilty of too little of the latter at times. I know this because I have seen new folks read these RFCs and not understand why something was done. Or, that something is important for some unstated, but crucial reason. Or, decide that we do X because of Y and so if Y is different then X can be, too---even though we did X because of Z and just didn't say it well. I am clearly not consensus, but to me the adoption question is completely premature when the document doesn't offer motivation that it is reasonable (beyond an intuitive hand wave that we're preventing slow start overshoot). Neal's note does sketch out why this might be an OK thing to do. And, probably IETF talks have, as well. But, some of that motivation has to make it into the document, it seems to me. allman
- [tcpm] Request for feedback on WG adoption of dra… Michael Tuexen
- Re: [tcpm] Request for feedback on WG adoption of… Mirja Kuehlewind
- Re: [tcpm] Request for feedback on WG adoption of… Mark Allman
- Re: [tcpm] Request for feedback on WG adoption of… Neal Cardwell
- Re: [tcpm] Request for feedback on WG adoption of… Mark Allman
- Re: [tcpm] Request for feedback on WG adoption of… Scheffenegger, Richard
- Re: [tcpm] Request for feedback on WG adoption of… Rodney W. Grimes
- Re: [tcpm] Request for feedback on WG adoption of… Mirja Kuehlewind
- Re: [tcpm] Request for feedback on WG adoption of… Scharf, Michael
- Re: [tcpm] Request for feedback on WG adoption of… Mark Allman
- Re: [tcpm] Request for feedback on WG adoption of… Mirja Kuehlewind
- Re: [tcpm] Request for feedback on WG adoption of… marcelo bagnulo braun