Re: [tcpm] TCP Tuning for HTTP - update

Gorry Fairhurst <gorry@erg.abdn.ac.uk> Thu, 18 August 2016 16:56 UTC

Return-Path: <gorry@erg.abdn.ac.uk>
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 BFFFF12D1ED for <tcpm@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 18 Aug 2016 09:56:23 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -5.447
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-5.447 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-1.247] autolearn=ham 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 TqZVJ-UA2Ny5 for <tcpm@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 18 Aug 2016 09:55:28 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from pegasus.erg.abdn.ac.uk (pegasus.erg.abdn.ac.uk [139.133.204.173]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1614F12DA15 for <tcpm@ietf.org>; Thu, 18 Aug 2016 09:54:54 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from dhcp-207-153.erg.abdn.ac.uk (unknown [IPv6:2001:630:241:207:b51c:f872:e0b8:c526]) by pegasus.erg.abdn.ac.uk (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 264D81B0024B; Thu, 18 Aug 2016 17:54:45 +0100 (BST)
References: <0CC24FC1-37E1-4125-9627-05726A9D9406@mnot.net> <655C07320163294895BBADA28372AF5D489E64AF@FR712WXCHMBA15.zeu.alcatel-lucent.com>
To: "Scharf, Michael (Nokia - DE)" <michael.scharf@nokia.com>, Mark Nottingham <mnot@mnot.net>, "tcpm@ietf.org" <tcpm@ietf.org>
From: Gorry Fairhurst <gorry@erg.abdn.ac.uk>
Organization: The University of Aberdeen is a charity registered in Scotland, No SC013683.
Message-ID: <61fa7faa-d2a3-e8f3-9497-1f0f93e7b81e@erg.abdn.ac.uk>
Date: Thu, 18 Aug 2016 17:54:48 +0100
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.10; rv:45.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/45.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <655C07320163294895BBADA28372AF5D489E64AF@FR712WXCHMBA15.zeu.alcatel-lucent.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="windows-1252"; format="flowed"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/tcpm/si_1Rb-bNssj4_WQuC_lD2DgubQ>
Cc: Patrick McManus <pmcmanus@mozilla.com>, Daniel Stenberg <daniel@haxx.se>
Subject: Re: [tcpm] TCP Tuning for HTTP - update
X-BeenThere: tcpm@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17
Precedence: list
Reply-To: gorry@erg.abdn.ac.uk
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: Thu, 18 Aug 2016 16:56:23 -0000

Speaking as someone who commented on an earlier version:

I think it is good to offer advice on how TCP is used for web traffic. I 
can see there is likely useful information that can document how some 
things are done, and perhaps also recommend some changes. I support 
continuing work on this.

Publishing a document like this in the RFC series needs to be consistent 
with IETF consensus. The ID touches on many things that are assigned to 
TCPM. (The breadth of topics may be a good reason for a document - but 
is also a concern, because many things need more clear description 
before the recommendations become clear).

I think this document should NOT be considered as BCP. It talks about 
system configuration of endpoints, and of the recommendations I see, 
some do support current PSs, some set new precedents against current PS 
RFCs and in some cases the present text appears to endorse EXP RFCs. If 
published as a BCP, that sort of advice is likely to be confusing. Such 
information can also easily be outdated, I suggest if adopted, this 
should be Informational and clearly set the scope of the recommendations.

If this work continues, it needs to be reviewed by TCPM and HTTPbis. 
This would need much more than simply a last-call in both working groups 
- but I'm sure with proper coordination progress could be made so that 
there were no surprises for either group at the time of WGLC!

Gorry


>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: tcpm [mailto:tcpm-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Mark Nottingham
> Sent: Wednesday, August 17, 2016 4:03 AM
> To: tcpm@ietf.org
> Cc: Patrick McManus; Daniel Stenberg
> Subject: [tcpm] TCP Tuning for HTTP - update
>
> Hi TCPM,
>
> Just a quick note; Daniel and Tim have made an update to the TCP Tuning for HTTP draft:
>   https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-stenberg-httpbis-tcp
>
> We've had a Call for Adoption open for this draft for a while, and will likely adopt it soon. However, we'd like to get feedback from this community first -- both about the latest version of the input document, and to see if there's interest in helping out.
>
> You can give feedback on the HTTP WG mailing list <https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/ietf-http-wg/>, or  by responding to this e-mail (Please leave the CC line; Patrick and I will try to summarise the feedback to the WG).
>
> Cheers,
>
> --
> Mark Nottingham   https://www.mnot.net/
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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
>