IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [tsvwg] plan for L4S issue #29

Jonathan Morton <chromatix99@gmail.com> Wed, 30 September 2020 03:29 UTC

Return-Path: <chromatix99@gmail.com>
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 243723A0D4A for <tsvwg@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 29 Sep 2020 20:29:43 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.848
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.848 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_ENVFROM_END_DIGIT=0.25, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com
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 6DI8AlL7uC_x for <tsvwg@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 29 Sep 2020 20:29:42 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-lf1-x133.google.com (mail-lf1-x133.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4864:20::133]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 9BA793A0D40 for <tsvwg@ietf.org>; Tue, 29 Sep 2020 20:29:41 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-lf1-x133.google.com with SMTP id w11so381576lfn.2 for <tsvwg@ietf.org>; Tue, 29 Sep 2020 20:29:41 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:subject:from:in-reply-to:date:cc :content-transfer-encoding:message-id:references:to; bh=OU1+X7+6reOWheE2gnVI1YrxaiqBEKE9JhPLAVhjUX4=; b=pM01YPDH7DH7C/HyMmZx70rg7kCy5Kkv8nLRmlS5GCA7TcYMj3oFallbeCUmu9fbuV 9UOHYNKz2CerSzQ1XM9JAzpoYdYfb1f7fjjvSESXg6jElPHYdlEJ8y9bY/u5B4v0PcLH 49FwuTaAAAlhCW96SXLCOFScSD1mtx2hGKwmwi1A3M1UzriBlA2tBr3pMo8ClvsHntEZ BfO+zfnbDdAl9A563zLpQf+obCWK62jlcqWRLHeXvs4kTAAxL/bZh5C7/DJp3+EOHvWr eaof/bkZ9EQfIrB1u8q/wW3sSFOl2YLMqoNWei3p1uHUM5pj1TEt+RoFUj0AF40H7jyP pfnw==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:subject:from:in-reply-to:date:cc :content-transfer-encoding:message-id:references:to; bh=OU1+X7+6reOWheE2gnVI1YrxaiqBEKE9JhPLAVhjUX4=; b=Sjq90jlV332HUc2+6XxMhOHkWV/nqkw+uiefEIJ+eWlh3Mt01iFB3h6JIFmfixzxyJ H4DE1Ro/KjGg/OygTOoSD7vnhbctK4ja9wZuAKe/tsIsHiJcpUnjfjDIyiey9HO2EOm+ 8SbYgmw3ArvSHSgv+geX6DpT8t6qx/nJb6TdHkabmPT/UbqGt5Fk/HzoFsGkXDh/q7zV WrAhVfyaXPwAEnM/5dpUJiuSFtY0I4IDs4iiUCcJ7iKrCUJaCa+L1DN+nm57uiCBlZmC vrtobhVBfZIMh+DMbOHGznTFRmFJLPk3kgquf3nczg7rk63PZe6kSHbTztkLxq5VZk3/ wWlw==
X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM530EOjJHSjhGAkqbLTQWOg8xdjC4X/6AWYlYkn+Axu//vzVDkkJ/ eFx5U7RdEidbZtk90sDkp5SJ9rD1mio=
X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJy3bnWQoAXgPKndI+my8JSefRBlxTgZidJdRuh2wDWveUnwic+iPevwCLdiQLCD5rbtsfCXVA==
X-Received: by 2002:a19:ca1e:: with SMTP id a30mr113365lfg.575.1601436579783; Tue, 29 Sep 2020 20:29:39 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from jonathartonsmbp.lan (178-55-170-35.bb.dnainternet.fi. [178.55.170.35]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id q4sm30895lfm.46.2020.09.29.20.29.38 (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-ECDSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Tue, 29 Sep 2020 20:29:38 -0700 (PDT)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 11.5 \(3445.9.6\))
From: Jonathan Morton <chromatix99@gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <73562E45-3EE7-43D4-B26B-76478AE19AF8@cablelabs.com>
Date: Wed, 30 Sep 2020 06:29:37 +0300
Cc: Gorry Fairhurst <gorry@erg.abdn.ac.uk>, "Rodney W. Grimes" <ietf@gndrsh.dnsmgr.net>, Mikael Abrahamsson <swmike=40swm.pp.se@dmarc.ietf.org>, "tsvwg@ietf.org" <tsvwg@ietf.org>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-Id: <94AC09FD-76B6-4A34-ADC9-AD3AAC4E5111@gmail.com>
References: <202009291549.08TFnvFV068509@gndrsh.dnsmgr.net> <c7080365-233c-5f1e-ef5c-1f42c969042a@erg.abdn.ac.uk> <73562E45-3EE7-43D4-B26B-76478AE19AF8@cablelabs.com>
To: Greg White <g.white@CableLabs.com>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3445.9.6)
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/tsvwg/Xok863H7dJu-buE3gMIeZaTyHxM>
Subject: Re: [tsvwg] plan for L4S issue #29
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: Wed, 30 Sep 2020 03:29:43 -0000

> On 30 Sep, 2020, at 1:48 am, Greg White <g.white@CableLabs.com> wrote:
> 
> I believe that the WG needs to honor the consensus position

Let me be absolutely crystal clear:  There was NO consensus position established.  Please go back and read the statements by the Chairs if you are still unclear on that point.

The Chairs made an executive decision, in the absence of consensus, to allow work to continue on L4S.  Progress is therefore expected on resolving the open issues to the satisfaction of the WG as a whole.  The SCE team is respecting that decision for the time being, but we will continue to call out deficiencies that have not been rectified and any further attempts to bypass the processes of the WG.

Let me quote David Black once more, for emphasis:

> I am confident that TSVWG does not currently have rough consensus that the L4S experiment is safe to perform on the Internet.  RFC 7282 is relevant background reading on rough consensus.

That is the central problem that L4S needs to resolve.  If it cannot do so, it should step aside so that alternative approaches to high-fidelity congestion control can be tried.

 - Jonathan Morton

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email