Re: [tcpm] Draft agenda for London

[Brandon Williams <[e-mail]>]

Hi Michael,

I can see that the schedules for both sessions are already quite full. 
That said, if there is any flexibility in the schedule for Monday's 
"Individual Drafts" session and if people on the list think that it 
would be a reasonable use of the time, we would be happy to prepare a 
short presentation focused on use-cases and vendor interoperability for 
the HOST_ID option. Our goal would be to facilitate discussion on 
whether or not it makes sense for us to pursue tcpm adoption of the 
I.D., as opposed to publishing the draft under individual contributor 
guidelines. If we give such a presentation, I think it would be about 20 
minutes worth of discussion.

If the time isn't available or attendees don't think that the time would 
be well spent, then I'll continue with my current plan of trying to get 
a bit of between-meeting facetime with the handful of people who have 
contributed the most to this discussion on the list.

Thanks,
--Brandon

On 02/14/2014 08:52 AM, Scharf, Michael (Michael) wrote:
> Hi Dirk,
>
> TCPM is an I*E*TF working group. As such, we we wonder whether there is an engineering need for TCPM standardization of an option, e.g., instead of an individual document.
>
> One (potential) motivation for spending TCPM cycles would be a clear need for interoperability between different entities (e.g., products from multiple vendors), combined with the willingness to contribute to TCPM standardization and a high likelyhood of (commercial/Internet-scale) adoption of a TCPM standard, e.g., as replacement of existing proprietary solutions.
>
> Thanks
>
> Michael
>
> ________________________________________
> Von: [e-mail] [[e-mail]]
> Gesendet: Freitag, 14. Februar 2014 14:28
> An: Scharf, Michael (Michael); [e-mail]; [e-mail]
> Cc: [e-mail]; [e-mail]
> Betreff: RE: [tcpm] Draft agenda for London
>
> Hi Michael,
> Thanks for the question: As far as I know my company does not have such plans - my interest is more an academic one being from research entity T-Labs.
> In that sense I am eager to discuss aspects of 'reality check' for deployment of protocols making use of host_id or similar features which may help to improve a service (e.g. emergency caller location) while bearing danger of misuse (observation, tracking) and how to prevent that ...
> Sorry for having raised unintended expectations potentially ;-(
>
> Best regards
> Dirk
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Scharf, Michael (Michael) [mailto:[e-mail]]
> Sent: Freitag, 14. Februar 2014 11:39
> To: von Hugo, Dirk; [e-mail]; [e-mail]
> Cc: [e-mail]; [e-mail]
> Subject: 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: [e-mail] [[e-mail]]
> Gesendet: Freitag, 14. Februar 2014 10:45
> Bis: Scharf, Michael (Michael); [e-mail]; [e-mail]
> Cc: [e-mail]; [e-mail]
> 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:[e-mail]] On Behalf Of Scharf, Michael (Michael)
> Sent: Freitag, 14. Februar 2014 09:27
> To: [e-mail]; Yuchung Cheng
> Cc: [e-mail]; [e-mail] 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: [e-mail] [[e-mail]]
> Gesendet: Freitag, 14. Februar 2014 08:38
> Bis: Yuchung Cheng
> Cc: Scharf, Michael (Michael); [e-mail]; [e-mail] 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)" <
>> [e-mail]> 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
>>> [e-mail]
>>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tcpm
>> _______________________________________________
>> tcpm mailing list
>> [e-mail]
>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tcpm
>>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> tcpm mailing list
> [e-mail]
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tcpm
>
> _______________________________________________
> tcpm mailing list
> [e-mail]
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tcpm
>

-- 
Brandon Williams; Senior Principal Software Engineer
Emerging Products Engineering; Akamai Technologies Inc.