Re: [tsvwg] FW: Milestones changed for tsvwg WG

Bob Briscoe <> Wed, 10 March 2021 23:25 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id DF3343A0D4B for <>; Wed, 10 Mar 2021 15:25:16 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.434
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.434 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, NICE_REPLY_A=-0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_SOFTFAIL=0.665, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=no autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key)
Received: from ([]) by localhost ( []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id XMm2wKrZ13qL for <>; Wed, 10 Mar 2021 15:25:14 -0800 (PST)
Received: from ( []) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 6A0C43A0CFE for <>; Wed, 10 Mar 2021 15:25:14 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed;; s=default; h=Content-Transfer-Encoding:Content-Type: In-Reply-To:MIME-Version:Date:Message-ID:From:References:To:Subject:Sender: Reply-To:Cc:Content-ID:Content-Description:Resent-Date:Resent-From: Resent-Sender:Resent-To:Resent-Cc:Resent-Message-ID:List-Id:List-Help: List-Unsubscribe:List-Subscribe:List-Post:List-Owner:List-Archive; bh=DcANW9sU2A9NCQrr/jSs7pIptYvP9ozmrf8KYyb+XJ8=; b=UiMFHqLItoIJ91qgjPTUykOA2r cUAYJrW0ZrSfoiQDRorIu7xJEQXJQTxAU/BcAJmf21A9MTlFss20qYQz6Ggg1JYuh9xbF1h56Q9wN 2tXIpjtKpmwGJEg+f99sPsm1InPN0UfJanl05s0hblDFqCLr7WXgsIC8l9sDwxPAM3T+1p/hdFWWs Q4qZ8eg70DG5E3EDQ57p1CXvuzLI9vmofjsxIVxWHFBsc3/SLDht8MOd1cWosstqQO54utbhuJTKX 0cxh5kUEEdpwkHWLEzfQv8Taw8Xhgy+lt3sW5uGcAV1gUdDB/cqrPpRYwgevu6FY1xDJcsqZebff7 raLaEznw==;
Received: from ([]:45766 helo=[]) by with esmtpsa (TLS1.2) tls TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 (Exim 4.93) (envelope-from <>) id 1lK8CU-0002z2-Nv; Wed, 10 Mar 2021 23:25:10 +0000
To: "Black, David" <>, "" <>
References: <> <> <> <>
From: Bob Briscoe <>
Message-ID: <>
Date: Wed, 10 Mar 2021 23:25:10 +0000
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:78.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/78.7.1
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"; format="flowed"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Language: en-GB
X-AntiAbuse: This header was added to track abuse, please include it with any abuse report
X-AntiAbuse: Primary Hostname -
X-AntiAbuse: Original Domain -
X-AntiAbuse: Originator/Caller UID/GID - [47 12] / [47 12]
X-AntiAbuse: Sender Address Domain -
X-Get-Message-Sender-Via: authenticated_id:
Archived-At: <>
Subject: Re: [tsvwg] FW: Milestones changed for tsvwg WG
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: Transport Area Working Group <>
List-Unsubscribe: <>, <>
List-Archive: <>
List-Post: <>
List-Help: <>
List-Subscribe: <>, <>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 10 Mar 2021 23:25:22 -0000


On 09/03/2021 14:37, Black, David wrote:
> Hi Bob,
> The only change that was made to the L4S draft milestones was to move the architecture draft

[BB] Yes, I've been reminded by my colleagues that the other two drafts' 
milestones were already Oct 2021.

> milestone from this past October (clearly missed) to join the other drafts, whose milestones are currently set to this coming October.  We can certainly discuss L4S progress/timing tomorrow.

We didn't miss last October's milestone for l4s-arch. -07 was ready to 
go on 27 Oct '20, and the draft is still ready to go. This is what I 
mean about "bring me a rock" We were asked to get l4s-arch ready to go 
through before the others (on the basis it would be held back from RFC, 
but still worth getting the process started). We met the milestone, and 
now the milestone has moved by a whole year.

I did a rev to l4s-arch on 15 Nov 20, with some minor editorial fiddling 
with where references to drafts first appeared. But nothing technical, 
and I explained that it's now written so it is agnostic to what happens 
about l4sops / Classic ECN AQM.


> Thanks, --David
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Bob Briscoe <>
> Sent: Monday, March 8, 2021 5:22 PM
> To: Black, David;
> Subject: Re: [tsvwg] FW: Milestones changed for tsvwg WG
> David,
> I'm afraid I missed the beginning of the meeting (a dumb error on my part with time zone). Sorry about that.
> Yes, I think we're either there, or almost there on the encap drafts. If we do have agreement, we could possibly go straight after this meeting - sooner than June anyway.
> Can we review the L4S milestones at the closing part of the L4S session on Wed? It seems a bit back-to-front to decide the milestones before the progress has been reported.
> Bob
> On 08/03/2021 21:06, Black, David wrote:
>> This is the update to the WG milestones as discussed in the meeting.  There are three groups of drafts wrt the milestones:
>> 	1. Before next IETF meeting (June milestones): The two ECN encapsulation drafts and the UDP options draft
>> 	2. Around next IETF meeting or not too long thereafter (September milestones, allowing for not much to happen in August): SCTP.bis and NQB PHB.
>> 	3. Before IETF meeting after next (October milestones): L4S drafts.
>> Thanks, --David
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: tsvwg <> On Behalf Of IETF Secretariat
>> Sent: Monday, March 8, 2021 2:31 PM
>> To:
>> Subject: [tsvwg] Milestones changed for tsvwg WG
>> Changed milestone "Submit 'Guidelines for Adding Congestion Notification to Protocols that Encapsulate IP' as a BCP RFC", set due date to June 2021 from November 2020.
>> Changed milestone "Submit 'Propagating Explicit Congestion Notification Across IP Tunnel Headers Separated by a Shim' as a Proposed Standard RFC", set due date to June 2021 from November 2020.
>> Changed milestone "Submit " Transport Options for UDP" as a Proposed Standard RFC", set due date to June 2021 from February 2021.
>> Changed milestone "Submit "Stream Control Transmission Protocol" aka RFC4960.bis as a Proposed Standard RFC", set due date to September 2021 from December 2020.
>> Changed milestone "Submit "A Non-Queue-Building Per-Hop Behavior (NQB PHB) for Differentiated Services" as a Proposed Standard RFC", set due date to September 2021 from February 2021.
>> Changed milestone "Submit "Low Latency, Low Loss, Scalable Throughput (L4S) Internet Service: Architecture" as an Informational RFC", set due date to October 2021 from October 2020.
>> URL:
> --
> ________________________________________________________________
> Bob Briscoe                     

Bob Briscoe