IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [tcpm] Reminder: WGLC for draft-ietf-tcpm-accurate-ecn-26

rs.ietf@gmx.at Mon, 06 November 2023 10:42 UTC

Return-Path: <rs.ietf@gmx.at>
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 38BD7C1D46EC; Mon, 6 Nov 2023 02:42:54 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.806
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.806 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H2=-0.001, RCVD_IN_ZEN_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_SCC_BODY_TEXT_LINE=-0.01, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001, URIBL_DBL_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001, URIBL_ZEN_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmx.at
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([50.223.129.194]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id jpvbn-JHpg2F; Mon, 6 Nov 2023 02:42:50 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mout.gmx.net (mout.gmx.net [212.227.15.18]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange ECDHE (P-256) server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 1842AC1E4E5F; Mon, 6 Nov 2023 02:42:49 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=gmx.at; s=s31663417; t=1699267365; x=1699872165; i=rs.ietf@gmx.at; bh=gxd8MLh5os/KUtrEqDGnHhnsVXdVuoY/9on6ygdYQH0=; h=X-UI-Sender-Class:Date:From:Reply-To:Subject:To:Cc:References: In-Reply-To; b=XWgtTOoEhD8dYnsVIcAaDkRHveRehHtI3KXL+cor4q8yhxHCv8BJfIF4dgE9GFn5 aboTNXZ0CK+r1+d0hRHpDEvYXSse6FK+cSgynQxdI58aTTTnps/HkLXoOtHKhb/vh nr7Zt5silCftSUIICAg+W5UTMNTj20FFQpIotXgFKV1f4s77alwwNlBhaaURmgEdT c78PONeKuCkeXA9UrSFKpB+92eZfD+QBty9tFuC1dKeiyTzB2aa3flxCh0GOZgFgA z7Zo3k08W5XIcm0dLoA/NcBmOSZ+aBk7dkbEZ389sdB9Lw1OYTBlVwQx7eWJW3f3+ kd4pvzZ9S+6APqAr/Q==
X-UI-Sender-Class: 724b4f7f-cbec-4199-ad4e-598c01a50d3a
Received: from [10.67.129.109] ([217.70.210.46]) by mail.gmx.net (mrgmx004 [212.227.17.190]) with ESMTPSA (Nemesis) id 1M3UUy-1r0V1z35ne-000YWC; Mon, 06 Nov 2023 11:42:45 +0100
Message-ID: <fffb488d-913c-4a01-b88b-f9dbb02f4a62@gmx.at>
Date: Mon, 06 Nov 2023 11:42:46 +0100
MIME-Version: 1.0
User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird
From: rs.ietf@gmx.at
Reply-To: rs.ietf@gmx.at
To: Markku Kojo <kojo=40cs.helsinki.fi@dmarc.ietf.org>, tuexen@fh-muenster.de
Cc: tcpm IETF list <tcpm@ietf.org>
References: <1204E97B-9524-4C9F-8D06-7F81E1F28A6F@fh-muenster.de> <347C33E0-FDFD-4ED9-93FD-397AE361D6DE@cs.helsinki.fi>
In-Reply-To: <347C33E0-FDFD-4ED9-93FD-397AE361D6DE@cs.helsinki.fi>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"; format="flowed"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
X-Provags-ID: V03:K1:3yUlgR8+xIVLi4X9pdntSPBjN1MG8XbHI0Zdmhyx0oU3XSz2aPP nm8DxBy0qRlszbFR28x0a9BZndh+EtlPUbOo+K6w4T46CZxO4ajGqEyuPTb8K43gDmwHiuj 33zMQDahDuAbYXih5MWoyAgGUsxPkgoTD4bS7Ymg/ITOu/sOlge3qIa294CtWAsFVF7m3oy ZltRHuTk5cqKFzfDOwZnw==
UI-OutboundReport: notjunk:1;M01:P0:yPGR5WTb7oo=;SpHH6qn321sYVkMoZarVbYKcXSZ EuMAMrazl5afnvw0k7AJDTcK3eSJVR3CdNHFZHfrMNF3TRUkr/4Kdd5TrvEfOevilYWCa3NcM lgAeDYLPHh9303iw9X8IBHce9Pe1BP7pa1Hg6MKoH9bOA4tYjHDAt4zPAQzZPtki5hcKQXRlL rBw0o4MRPiU/UfuTTbRL9dBqiIqtYh1GaWdY8CW03D+on0mRB0jr2xjMxJOB2KTk6OP5qVYGX Z+xElDBsQwDenzLcYpkCdtZtibyZ2+BUkMQuKooq+KQC6VuB5TpUpmGlFW2HaJzSRqrbFMx68 rj/ZG2vdGzNzD00ClIbUtURVSYGtqbv+f8G5y8X+RoOssL3yRrlr2+QR+KLS3RLI+/AeRVv2a PS2hY+l8nJ+3pqYX8GJjxS1Q2YriZ09/6NM22tZR7cnL1sBsD/P+f8ac+O5Li9AGgxhRE57Jb ggq4G8hYV40M3dMs+OBR3kmOe7wGQqp1RaF2XLGBCH1E6eGmFLlax5FXRZWJujIYvdEzAzI77 ANZBP0u8xvIBqGGrKPHCHmu2injdNnPTFFT54eejlLuW9hq1dNnAQk/bbt3GbcPaGnxNejPmH DTpGGj2HZjdKyF/CACLlta3AJdQj6AzPUXn8EJgKhK4PhzkyZ02XyDaG55fD30ah+y4KzJCYA G79bl42usIw2E6sU6qc4xmAzeqG6iuvBDILxzXygZ4xg7v4Llx7Hjkps+kmDKmSztvsW70b7q F4a2eciIw/WOR2F0aPIkEfI5dF81VqjVUuj3RLIhaVEmuoj+IBxWCRiLyM3x/t9ebaUWyacQA bMi5CXNkjCqMIuQdbCsvGWFmviF4+BzC3WpnyPJXP4b56FB4OSSnkB1nAJFIakxXN9sN2/+Yf IJNEcZ0+auRe4D7jFdLpNdGBvTIRq8OaW/dzW+KZr2w+64xr1nXHe/Ng2+8Qo8tefTWHIwMkZ wuMlXXROEu32b8mL4gyBuQjX02s=
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/tcpm/v9Aq3q_Tk4WiQQQg7oM13AFjzbU>
Subject: Re: [tcpm] Reminder: WGLC for draft-ietf-tcpm-accurate-ecn-26
X-BeenThere: tcpm@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.39
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: Mon, 06 Nov 2023 10:42:54 -0000

Hi Markku,

Can you please elaborate again why DSACK needs to be implemented for a SACK-enabled session, in order to detect and differentiate true loss (the core aspect of SACK itself) vs. spurious retransmissions (which are to be avoided, e.g. by not counting identical ACKs with different ACE values against the duplicate ACK threshold)?


A worked example with / without DSACK and under what circumstances there may be a dramatic impact, would be indeed very helpful.

Thank you very much!

Richard


Am 06.11.2023 um 11:09 schrieb Markku Kojo:
> Hi Michael,
>
> catching up…
>
> I am afraid that the crucial piece not addressed is that this approach assumes that by enabling SACK would also enable DSACK in full which is not the case. Therefore, the suggested rule in ECN++ does not result in correct operation for RACK-TLP and F-RTO. It requires correct impöementation at both ends.
>
> I’ve already tried to explain this earlier but try to come up with a detailed list clarifying the actions needed at each end later today.
>
> Thanks,
>
> /Markku
>
>
>> tuexen@fh-muenster.de kirjoitti 27.10.2023 kello 19.35:
>>
>> 
>>>
>>> On Sep 21, 2023, at 19:51, tuexen@fh-muenster.de wrote:
>>>
>>> Dear all,
>>>
>>> this e-mail is a gentle reminder for the 2nd working group last call for
>>> draft-ietf-tcpm-accurate-ecn-26.
>>>
>>> The WGLC runs until Friday, September 22nd 2023.
>>>
>>> Please send any comments, including indications to support this document,
>>> to the TCMP mailing list by then.
>>>
>>> In particular, if you have made comments during the first WGLC, indicate whether
>>> the comments have been addressed or not.
>>>
>>> The ID is available at
>>> https://www.ietf.org/archive/id/draft-ietf-tcpm-accurate-ecn-26.html
>> Dear all,
>>
>> based on the feedback, the WG chairs have declared consensus on this document.
>> We do understand that not all all feedback provided was addressed in a way
>> expected by the person giving the feedback.
>>
>> Best regards
>> Michael
>>>
>>> Best regards
>>> Michael
>>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> 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

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email