IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [tsvwg] Gorry Fairhurst Individual thoughts on choosing whether/how to advance ECN work.

Paul Vixie <paul@redbarn.org> Sun, 24 May 2020 05:16 UTC

Return-Path: <paul@redbarn.org>
X-Original-To: tsvwg@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: tsvwg@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5068B3A03F7 for <tsvwg@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sat, 23 May 2020 22:16:15 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.899
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.899 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] 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 IBEPFSOwZiqY for <tsvwg@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sat, 23 May 2020 22:16:11 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from family.redbarn.org (family.redbarn.org [IPv6:2001:559:8000:cd::5]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 33D953A03F3 for <tsvwg@ietf.org>; Sat, 23 May 2020 22:16:10 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from linux-9daj.localnet (vixp1.redbarn.org [24.104.150.140]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (Client did not present a certificate) by family.redbarn.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id AF2E7B074A; Sun, 24 May 2020 05:16:09 +0000 (UTC)
From: Paul Vixie <paul@redbarn.org>
To: Bob Briscoe <ietf@bobbriscoe.net>, tsvwg@ietf.org
Cc: tsvwg@ietf.org, Jonathan Morton <chromatix99@gmail.com>
Date: Sun, 24 May 2020 05:16:08 +0000
Message-ID: <4335924.Is1giz6gEJ@linux-9daj>
Organization: none
In-Reply-To: <1565A7C1-1DF1-4C6A-AC37-14331AC87508@gmail.com>
References: <dbc71da6-70f1-7369-1d2d-f08fb3b08b69@erg.abdn.ac.uk> <af3e6272-c04d-9e81-763c-e690ed521749@bobbriscoe.net> <1565A7C1-1DF1-4C6A-AC37-14331AC87508@gmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/tsvwg/8RX_QMsSNMgyvNnZwODVU6HE5us>
Subject: Re: [tsvwg] Gorry Fairhurst Individual thoughts on choosing whether/how to advance ECN work.
X-BeenThere: tsvwg@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: Transport Area Working Group <tsvwg.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/tsvwg>, <mailto:tsvwg-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/tsvwg/>
List-Post: <mailto:tsvwg@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:tsvwg-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tsvwg>, <mailto:tsvwg-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 24 May 2020 05:16:16 -0000

On Sunday, 24 May 2020 04:21:53 UTC Jonathan Morton wrote:
> > On 24 May, 2020, at 2:53 am, Bob Briscoe <ietf@bobbriscoe.net> wrote:
> > 
> > ...
> 
> ...
> 
> I think I'll leave Paul and Sebastian to comment further in this vein.

i can't do better than what you said here. the smoke seems thick and the 
mirrors well positioned. there is no way to thread the needle in a way that 
avoids the best-efforts and physical limits, has trusted end to end signals 
beyond an enterprise or cloud or isp, and won't be bleached.

no packet is undroppable, no matter how marked: when the last queue is full, 
some packet won't reach its destination.

in "rise of the stupid network" (isenberg) and "elements of networking style" 
(padlipsky) were were told not to make the network smart and we were told why. 
i feel like howard the duck ("trapped in a world he never made") watching this 
discussion unfold.

my dispute stands unresolved, on the process matters i described. one chair 
has spoken no-hats on that thread, which clarified very little.

-- 
Paul

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email