Re: [tcpm] IANA TCP options registry ...

Alexander Zimmermann <Alexander.Zimmermann@nets.rwth-aachen.de> Thu, 01 April 2010 08:35 UTC

Return-Path: <Alexander.Zimmermann@nets.rwth-aachen.de>
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 CB4293A6926 for <tcpm@core3.amsl.com>; Thu, 1 Apr 2010 01:35:37 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.884
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.884 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.187, BAYES_00=-2.599, DNS_FROM_OPENWHOIS=1.13, HELO_EQ_DE=0.35, HELO_MISMATCH_DE=1.448, J_CHICKENPOX_61=0.6, 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 L-XJnnUMsjGq for <tcpm@core3.amsl.com>; Thu, 1 Apr 2010 01:35:36 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-i4.informatik.rwth-aachen.de (mail-i4.informatik.RWTH-Aachen.DE [137.226.12.21]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4F8BC3A67FA for <tcpm@ietf.org>; Thu, 1 Apr 2010 01:35:35 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from messenger.nets.rwth-aachen.de (messenger.nets.rwth-aachen.de [137.226.13.40]) by mail-i4.informatik.rwth-aachen.de (Postfix) with ESMTP id D1BB7578E9; Thu, 1 Apr 2010 10:36:06 +0200 (CEST)
Received: from MESSENGER.nets.rwth-aachen.de ([fe80::d0de:4cb1:8b0f:bd28]) by MESSENGER.nets.rwth-aachen.de ([fe80::d0de:4cb1:8b0f:bd28%14]) with mapi; Thu, 1 Apr 2010 10:35:49 +0200
From: Alexander Zimmermann <Alexander.Zimmermann@nets.rwth-aachen.de>
To: Lars Eggert <lars.eggert@nokia.com>
Thread-Topic: [tcpm] IANA TCP options registry ...
Thread-Index: Acq+TSNHzzS93gfiTSSoDXpuonjTlQTAN3aAAAFduwAABIkZAA==
Date: Thu, 1 Apr 2010 08:36:08 +0000
Message-ID: <264D66A5-73F5-4921-8696-032692E29269@nets.rwth-aachen.de>
References: <201003072316.AAA29042@TR-Sys.de> <5FDC413D5FA246468C200652D63E627A08144911@LDCMVEXC1-PRD.hq.netapp.com> <74EC24B3-8ACF-4C62-9D0C-163CBF911B1B@nokia.com>
In-Reply-To: <74EC24B3-8ACF-4C62-9D0C-163CBF911B1B@nokia.com>
Accept-Language: de-DE, en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-ID: <3d76db41-cf95-421a-aced-8407e85312c9>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
MIME-Version: 1.0
Cc: =?iso-8859-1?Q?Alfred_H=CEnes?= <ah@TR-Sys.de>, "tcpm@ietf.org" <tcpm@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [tcpm] IANA TCP options registry ...
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 08:35:37 -0000

Hi Lars,

Am 01.04.2010 um 08:26 schrieb Lars Eggert:

> Hi,
> 
> On 2010-4-1, at 8:47, Scheffenegger, Richard wrote:
>> Out of curiousity, does anyone know about the to-be assigned option number(s ?) for RFC 5690 (AckCChttp://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc5690).
>> 
>> Are there two option numbers proposed for that RFC, or will a single option (with the length field being the necessary denominator between AckCC control permitted and AckCC Ratio) suffice?
> 
> Section 10 is pretty clear, in that RFC5690 is for limited experimentation only at this time and hence no separate option numbers will be assigned. Experimenters are supposed to use the normal TCP option numbers set aside for general experimentation (253/254) when playing with this proposal:

this could be funny in Linux. You request ACKcc as TCP sender (option 253)
and get Mr. Simpson's TCP Cookie Transactions back ;-)

> 
>   No IANA action is needed at this time.  If this document was advanced
>   as Experimental or Proposed Standard, then IANA would allocate the
>   option numbers for the two TCP options, the ACK Congestion Control
>   Permitted option, and the ACK Ratio option.  In such a case, the
>   following two lines would be added to the TCP Option Numbers registry
>   (maintained by IANA -- http://www.iana.org):
> 
>        Kind   Length   Meaning                             Reference
>        ----   ------   ---------------------------------   -----------
>        TBD1       2    ACK Congestion Control Permitted    [RFCXXXX]
>        TBD2       3    ACK Ratio                           [RFCXXXX]
> 
>   In the absence of TCP option numbers allocated by IANA, experimenters
>   may use the TCP Option Numbers set aside for Experimentation in RFC
>   4727 [RFC4727].  As stressed in Section 1 of RFC 3692 [RFC3692], the
>   TCP Option Numbers in the experimental range are intended for
>   experimentation and testing and not for wide or general deployments;
>   these option numbers could be in use by other experimentors for other
>   purposes.
> 
> Lars_______________________________________________
> tcpm mailing list
> tcpm@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tcpm