IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [tcpm] [tsvwg] L4S status tracking

Wesley Eddy <wes@mti-systems.com> Wed, 06 November 2019 19:54 UTC

Return-Path: <wes@mti-systems.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 A00D5120241 for <tcpm@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 6 Nov 2019 11:54:59 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.899
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.899 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=unavailable autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=mti-systems-com.20150623.gappssmtp.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 eZgUbWfZuslJ for <tcpm@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 6 Nov 2019 11:54:56 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail-qt1-x836.google.com (mail-qt1-x836.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::836]) (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 27FCC1207FC for <tcpm@ietf.org>; Wed, 6 Nov 2019 11:54:54 -0800 (PST)
Received: by mail-qt1-x836.google.com with SMTP id y39so35109678qty.0 for <tcpm@ietf.org>; Wed, 06 Nov 2019 11:54:54 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=mti-systems-com.20150623.gappssmtp.com; s=20150623; h=subject:to:cc:references:from:message-id:date:user-agent :mime-version:in-reply-to:content-language; bh=oyrfaMCyOW/5bioUBJg2CMPZezekC2jcVwLQjcpRVjA=; b=wBqQK/+0uMVtzjvfjRYjCnnjypscRW7IZHrt3FLOZ992i4UQSElFsLhmUd9CP0jpPK yYKexmdBI+kpuP8ITGa2ETj/RNKBLqBZnwOI6HjgOySuouTZLbec02fxtGmyKeCPNRHU IySOf4Lv8GDs401jO83Q9aYQhfoPpns/apIM7sENJlYmRbkc3Mx5izOUgxU6vTcpHRV+ 0UP2cHIaXJXBHPTphIb5RUala845teeSuZ1DTB0IgR7+elwZ1MfPY976Mdp2IfiMmY4f kUZgaiUKWWRBgocMq9zRJDN5C1AIDQapvcAmrizTTuS5DnS9IkZ3r0lclt38MISGefub 7cLA==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:subject:to:cc:references:from:message-id:date :user-agent:mime-version:in-reply-to:content-language; bh=oyrfaMCyOW/5bioUBJg2CMPZezekC2jcVwLQjcpRVjA=; b=ivfQAry7iBlXVU/NNxlZNmInRq7jwXFB0rgv1c0uFW9ZXLZsKF+NTm3LgHQm0AjBPJ 6u8HFumQ5cwI+Fme9PIU+pCb2NQqTBonH7Jvj+6uy5JAsLsnZk4eOmyDyxE7jI8h1bX/ OnKUxFTFCK8/yQkcYS9QIqefcRz2TJ7PRAXpaLqiTn4ChMXvJfRh1p5NKbawkdTb3QLu Ou93BO1B+iJmmulhktm4PZkrUYiz/RXwQwbsH0sLqmtOAXLOuBRWLgR2okwgK+TPqcd/ 6tEYJtP1FVZUhJCXIfwOnSxc0FDagFzEtKmHXQi/+qnJIi1UqHQWbIdiDVRon11EsKvK UsHg==
X-Gm-Message-State: APjAAAUc9hNPczOD0qTAdnZ4AXzCuMN7Eyf6sAEax5gszHiGyfs6fBXU gIOdS3a5VPaKiaJ8pK/YwAumFebhWEo=
X-Google-Smtp-Source: APXvYqxg+6i0ZQQ7JDeatRxS3FX++LOItChn3dRA8PFFluNtavXzWvHn7J4DrSAu88QgvR3oztMsOg==
X-Received: by 2002:aed:37c9:: with SMTP id j67mr4309748qtb.291.1573070072320; Wed, 06 Nov 2019 11:54:32 -0800 (PST)
Received: from [192.168.1.11] (user-12l31c7.cable.mindspring.com. [69.81.133.135]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id j7sm9406499qkd.46.2019.11.06.11.54.31 (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Wed, 06 Nov 2019 11:54:31 -0800 (PST)
To: "Scharf, Michael" <Michael.Scharf@hs-esslingen.de>, Bob Briscoe <ietf@bobbriscoe.net>, "Rodney W. Grimes" <4bone@gndrsh.dnsmgr.net>
Cc: "tsvwg@ietf.org" <tsvwg@ietf.org>, "tcpm@ietf.org" <tcpm@ietf.org>
References: <6EC6417807D9754DA64F3087E2E2E03E2D4DE531@rznt8114.rznt.rzdir.fht-esslingen.de> <201911041917.xA4JH2nX002064@gndrsh.dnsmgr.net> <6EC6417807D9754DA64F3087E2E2E03E2D4DE88E@rznt8114.rznt.rzdir.fht-esslingen.de> <7f1aa4ae-05d6-b07c-50b0-ab899c5c30b7@bobbriscoe.net> <6EC6417807D9754DA64F3087E2E2E03E2D4E4829@rznt8114.rznt.rzdir.fht-esslingen.de> <bc12fc37-2c7a-d6c4-8372-3b341682c4bf@bobbriscoe.net> <6EC6417807D9754DA64F3087E2E2E03E2D4E64F3@rznt8114.rznt.rzdir.fht-esslingen.de>
From: Wesley Eddy <wes@mti-systems.com>
Message-ID: <f4b5bc68-5735-eccd-9abc-0e6a8d8e4ab2@mti-systems.com>
Date: Wed, 06 Nov 2019 14:54:27 -0500
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; WOW64; rv:60.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/60.9.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <6EC6417807D9754DA64F3087E2E2E03E2D4E64F3@rznt8114.rznt.rzdir.fht-esslingen.de>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="------------A71BEBE07D033A1E69D5A15F"
Content-Language: en-US
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/tcpm/r_xl01fMRGZg3M5R3hRMLaQZ6sY>
Subject: Re: [tcpm] [tsvwg] L4S status tracking
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: Wed, 06 Nov 2019 19:55:00 -0000

On 11/6/2019 1:57 PM, Scharf, Michael wrote:
>
> Bob,
>
> From draft-ietf-tsvwg-ecn-l4s-id-08: “It gives an incremental 
> migration path so that existing 'Classic' TCP traffic will be no worse 
> off”
>
> You are proposing an experiment. Not more than that. I will be fine 
> with the term “Classic” for TCP and TCPM-specified congestion control 
> when more than 50% of Internet traffic uses that new technology.
>
> Until this happens, I insist that the word “Classic” must be removed 
> in all context of TCP and congestion control (as far as it is owned by 
> TCPM), including the reference above. BTW, “normal” as suggested would 
> also work for me. So, you have plenty of options for other terms.
>

If Dave+Michael's suggestion of replacing "classic" with "normal" is 
agreable to others, this seems like a good way forward to me. It should 
be easy enough to explain in other SDOs that classic and normal mean the 
same thing, if this is a real issue.

(FWIW, I've never had a problem myself with "classic", nor read any 
negative connotations to it.  However, for the sake of working group 
progress, I think we just need to pick something that seems the least 
terrible and agree to move on.)

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email