Re: [tcpm] WGLC for draft-ietf-tcpm-converters-08

<> Tue, 09 July 2019 10:12 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id ACB8F120401; Tue, 9 Jul 2019 03:12:59 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.701
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.701 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key)
Received: from ([]) by localhost ( []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id KxMpjYRIkuXg; Tue, 9 Jul 2019 03:12:57 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ( []) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 3BADF1203FC; Tue, 9 Jul 2019 03:12:56 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ( by ( with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_CBC_SHA384_P256) id 15.1.1713.5; Tue, 9 Jul 2019 11:13:22 +0100
Received: from ( by ( with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.0.1395.4; Tue, 9 Jul 2019 11:12:53 +0100
Received: from ( by ( with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.0.1395.4 via Frontend Transport; Tue, 9 Jul 2019 11:12:53 +0100
Received: from ( by ( with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_CBC_SHA384_P256) id 15.1.1713.5; Tue, 9 Jul 2019 11:08:41 +0100
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;; s=selector2; h=From:Date:Subject:Message-ID:Content-Type:MIME-Version:X-MS-Exchange-SenderADCheck; bh=6dtNFo0eXzgG4gGDW3lWRD4uJspJd92MCsNx+m/GxKA=; b=XY7cen+pxdq6M6O4vof1CJTa46G70EO7WA6X/dIsGgsJ4ts3MOgMm7X+UPAnlM3eAmkH8dDAi3k4d0jObS0p9lV/1l0NIPmd1S9CSBZhoyHn2SsrcDSBax2D48at0n6BmahjTeDv+M02ZADEAYEj9U1Tf283A1LmLEqIrVZscdU=
Received: from LNXP123MB2587.GBRP123.PROD.OUTLOOK.COM ( by LNXP123MB2123.GBRP123.PROD.OUTLOOK.COM ( with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384) id 15.20.2052.19; Tue, 9 Jul 2019 10:07:59 +0000
Received: from LNXP123MB2587.GBRP123.PROD.OUTLOOK.COM ([fe80::10d8:71fc:f4d3:8074]) by LNXP123MB2587.GBRP123.PROD.OUTLOOK.COM ([fe80::10d8:71fc:f4d3:8074%7]) with mapi id 15.20.2052.020; Tue, 9 Jul 2019 10:07:59 +0000
From: <>
To: <>, <>, <>
CC: <>
Thread-Topic: WGLC for draft-ietf-tcpm-converters-08
Thread-Index: AdUrckm1sQAV9Sf8TqW1iT6fsU2DwgBZdsDwACioYfACL1MtoA==
Date: Tue, 9 Jul 2019 10:07:59 +0000
Message-ID: <LNXP123MB25875A76F9E90134441667F7EBF10@LNXP123MB2587.GBRP123.PROD.OUTLOOK.COM>
References: <> <LNXP123MB258781EFAC897351EDB153E2EBFD0@LNXP123MB2587.GBRP123.PROD.OUTLOOK.COM> <787AE7BB302AE849A7480A190F8B93302EAAF3AA@OPEXCAUBMA2.corporate.adroot.infra.ftgroup>
In-Reply-To: <787AE7BB302AE849A7480A190F8B93302EAAF3AA@OPEXCAUBMA2.corporate.adroot.infra.ftgroup>
Accept-Language: en-GB, en-US
Content-Language: en-US
authentication-results: spf=none (sender IP is );
x-originating-ip: []
x-ms-publictraffictype: Email
x-ms-office365-filtering-correlation-id: f8f58b7b-37ed-4e5b-2f16-08d704555282
x-microsoft-antispam: BCL:0; PCL:0; RULEID:(2390118)(7020095)(4652040)(8989299)(4534185)(4627221)(201703031133081)(201702281549075)(8990200)(5600148)(711020)(4605104)(1401327)(2017052603328)(7193020); SRVR:LNXP123MB2123;
x-ms-traffictypediagnostic: LNXP123MB2123:
x-microsoft-antispam-prvs: <LNXP123MB21232136E40D847782635480EBF10@LNXP123MB2123.GBRP123.PROD.OUTLOOK.COM>
x-antispam-2: 1
x-ms-oob-tlc-oobclassifiers: OLM:10000;
x-forefront-prvs: 0093C80C01
x-forefront-antispam-report: SFV:NSPM; SFS:(10009020)(4636009)(366004)(396003)(136003)(39860400002)(346002)(376002)(189003)(199004)(7696005)(305945005)(33656002)(74316002)(316002)(2906002)(102836004)(110136005)(99286004)(71190400001)(186003)(26005)(14454004)(4326008)(446003)(256004)(68736007)(8676002)(76176011)(6506007)(486006)(2501003)(11346002)(8936002)(476003)(71200400001)(81166006)(81156014)(25786009)(5660300002)(229853002)(86362001)(2201001)(73956011)(66946007)(66446008)(66476007)(52536014)(66556008)(64756008)(76116006)(6116002)(55016002)(7736002)(53936002)(9686003)(3846002)(6246003)(6436002)(478600001)(66066001); DIR:OUT; SFP:1101; SCL:1; SRVR:LNXP123MB2123; H:LNXP123MB2587.GBRP123.PROD.OUTLOOK.COM; FPR:; SPF:None; LANG:en; PTR:InfoNoRecords; MX:1; A:1;
received-spf: None ( does not designate permitted sender hosts)
x-ms-exchange-senderadcheck: 1
x-microsoft-antispam-message-info: K5+rKAWj+APPBpAZNr2OfaDLnFfPmtrZnolTh6XSsdlfmQ6BO3LykgQWi/k7Absk6U+ToX4kLLZPnuo8TaEg98cZ496enzr/WrYHZnZ8Mqg/2UEFFXVWMeGmkiiY/Q4J9Kap8gBferkfJuvCbWTjNgLoGACJyOQovOBc2MMe7UGddTn6sB2GqCsGn+5wikVS6F0YuYFB4v3Pfzw3unTlhNPOEzYSzFuw4rSx9GUgr8GDuzWSS2RENoKkOnEo8JbYlEEZCFRFaOulDMuIq96PUdeWm6S4LWxmdbBxk/scYCtAIyZDtvk9pL1RD5kwm2GHQF3p9PvTkAlNzQ+kcRgBeCURFGnIg9kvUcofa3LqRZkB09wsCvgVXo7aEB3IY5XRTgrOgeq8m1RoCEl4eJrAas+YeQeR23804tR4+C0TkSA=
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-Network-Message-Id: f8f58b7b-37ed-4e5b-2f16-08d704555282
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-originalarrivaltime: 09 Jul 2019 10:07:59.7879 (UTC)
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-fromentityheader: Hosted
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-id: a7f35688-9c00-4d5e-ba41-29f146377ab0
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-mailboxtype: HOSTED
X-MS-Exchange-Transport-CrossTenantHeadersStamped: LNXP123MB2123
X-NAI-Spam-Flag: NO
X-NAI-Spam-Threshold: 5
X-NAI-Spam-Score: 0.2
X-NAI-Spam-Report: 5 Rules triggered * 0.1 -- GEN_SPAM_FEATRE * 0.1 -- THREAD_INDX_INVALD_VAL * 0 -- EDT_SDHA_ADR_FRG * 0 -- EDT_SDHA_DMN_FRG * 0 -- RV6585
X-NAI-Spam-Version: : core <6585> : inlines <7115> : streams <1826840> : uri <2865510>
Archived-At: <>
Subject: Re: [tcpm] WGLC for draft-ietf-tcpm-converters-08
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: TCP Maintenance and Minor Extensions Working Group <>
List-Unsubscribe: <>, <>
List-Archive: <>
List-Post: <>
List-Help: <>
List-Subscribe: <>, <>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 09 Jul 2019 10:13:00 -0000

Thanks, just following up a couple of points.
> S4.1 title
> "fixed header" - is "fixed" needed?

[Med] It is fixed because it is present in all convert messages. Do you prefer "common" ?

[phil] I'd prefer if you explicitly stated that all Convert messages have this header. 
In fact, I think you could start Section 4 with text to capture the key points:
"This section describes the messages that are exchanged between a Client and a Transport Converter. All Convert protocol messages MUST be sent on a SYN, ACK or SYN-ACK, to port [tba]. All Convert protocol messages MUST be sent as the first bytes of the bytestream and MUST use the header shown in Figure 9 and described in Section 4.1, followed by the message itself using the generic TLV format shown in Figure 10 and described in Section 4.2. "

> " Transport Converter SHOULD include in this
>    list the TCP options that it accepts from Clients and that it
>    includes the SYN packets that it sends to initiate connections."
> I couldn't parse the second part of the sentence ("and that it...")

[Med] Changed to:

" A Transport Converter SHOULD include in
this list the TCP options that it accepts from Clients; these options are 
included by the Transport Converter in the SYN packets that it sends to initiate connections."


[phil] Yes. Instead of "are included" you could say MUST /SHOULD /MAY

> Section 6
> This section actually only discusses one type of middlebox (removes SYN).
> Can the discussion be widened slightly

[Med] This section only focuses on SYN/SYN-ACK because these are used by the Convert protocol.

Do you have in mind a particular case (specific to the Convert protocol) that may be problematic?

[phil] the section only discusses removal of SYN, and not other ways a middlebox could interfere with the SYN/ACK.