Re: [tcpm] Extending TCP option space

FWIW, I had offered to summarize the reasons why this has failed in the 
past (and, IMO, simply isn't useful to pursue).

Again, let me know.

Joe

On 8/31/2011 7:44 AM, SCHARF, Michael wrote:
> Hi Pasi,
>
>> TCP's option space has been under increasing demand recently, with new
>
>> option-space hungry extensions such as MPTCP, and some recent ideas in
>
>> the research domain. In the past there have been some discussion about
>
>> mechanisms to extend the option space, and an extension option was
>> proposed in draft-eddy-tcp-loo, but since then these efforts have died
>
>> down. I'm wondering if there would be any interest in the tcpm
>> community to resume this work.
>>
>> I recall that re-segmenting middleboxes were mentioned as one
>> potential problem for such extension, and there might be other
>> problems. Nevertheless, I would find it useful, if there was an RFC
>> that a) documented the known problems with option space extension; and
>
>> b) defined an option format and assigned the needed type codes, to
>> enable experimentations with larger than 40-byte option space.
>>
>> Thoughts?
>
> actually, I happened to argue in favor of a) in hallway discussions
> during the last IETF meetings. Maybe someone should just start to put
> together some text, at least for a)... (And I think it would really make
> sense to raise awareness among researchers that TCP option space in SYNs
> is a really scarce resource.)
>
> Michael
> _______________________________________________
> tcpm mailing list
> tcpm@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tcpm