Re: [tcpm] IANA TCP options registry ... policy amendments?

<L.Wood@surrey.ac.uk> Thu, 01 April 2010 13:11 UTC

Return-Path: <L.Wood@surrey.ac.uk>
X-Original-To: tcpm@core3.amsl.com
Delivered-To: tcpm@core3.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E5A3B3A69E2 for <tcpm@core3.amsl.com>; Thu, 1 Apr 2010 06:11:19 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -5.044
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-5.044 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.425, BAYES_00=-2.599, DNS_FROM_OPENWHOIS=1.13, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id zQqtdvapvWQQ for <tcpm@core3.amsl.com>; Thu, 1 Apr 2010 06:11:15 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail82.messagelabs.com (mail82.messagelabs.com [195.245.231.67]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7B7FE3A689B for <tcpm@ietf.org>; Thu, 1 Apr 2010 06:11:14 -0700 (PDT)
X-VirusChecked: Checked
X-Env-Sender: L.Wood@surrey.ac.uk
X-Msg-Ref: server-12.tower-82.messagelabs.com!1270127504!3994232!1
X-StarScan-Version: 6.2.4; banners=-,-,-
X-Originating-IP: [131.227.200.43]
Received: (qmail 11346 invoked from network); 1 Apr 2010 13:11:45 -0000
Received: from unknown (HELO EXHT022P.surrey.ac.uk) (131.227.200.43) by server-12.tower-82.messagelabs.com with AES128-SHA encrypted SMTP; 1 Apr 2010 13:11:45 -0000
Received: from EXMB01CMS.surrey.ac.uk ([169.254.1.49]) by EXHT022P.surrey.ac.uk ([131.227.200.43]) with mapi; Thu, 1 Apr 2010 14:11:44 +0100
From: <L.Wood@surrey.ac.uk>
To: <ah@TR-Sys.de>, <rs@netapp.com>
Date: Thu, 1 Apr 2010 14:10:39 +0100
Thread-Topic: [tcpm] IANA TCP options registry ... policy amendments?
Thread-Index: AcrRleFzWXmD9VKPQaGnYbN6H94aPwABthAK
Message-ID: <FD7B10366AE3794AB1EC5DE97A93A37305A1A2E790@EXMB01CMS.surrey.ac.uk>
References: <5FDC413D5FA246468C200652D63E627A08144911@LDCMVEXC1-PRD.hq.netapp.com> from "Scheffenegger, Richard" at Apr "1, " 2010 "06:47:09" am, <201004011207.OAA28159@TR-Sys.de>
In-Reply-To: <201004011207.OAA28159@TR-Sys.de>
Accept-Language: en-US, en-GB
Content-Language: en-GB
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
acceptlanguage: en-US, en-GB
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
MIME-Version: 1.0
Cc: tcpm@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [tcpm] IANA TCP options registry ... policy amendments?
X-BeenThere: tcpm@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
List-Id: TCP Maintenance and Minor Extensions Working Group <tcpm.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tcpm>, <mailto:tcpm-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/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, 01 Apr 2010 13:11:20 -0000

> Given the really scarce space in the TCP header
> for options, subtyping seems to be a poor tradeoff.

Revive
http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-eddy-tcp-loo

SACK will perform far better with a larger options space.

L.

http://sat-net.com/L.Wood