IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [tsvwg] Consensus call on ECT(1)

Lars Eggert <lars@eggert.org> Tue, 12 May 2020 15:39 UTC

Return-Path: <lars@eggert.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 B08983A0B49 for <tsvwg@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 12 May 2020 08:39:43 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -0.412
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.412 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, MISSING_HEADERS=1.021, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_SOFTFAIL=0.665, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=no autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=eggert.org
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 fMg5EeQEOVMX for <tsvwg@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 12 May 2020 08:39:42 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from fgw21-4.mail.saunalahti.fi (fgw21-4.mail.saunalahti.fi [62.142.5.108]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4A9DA3A0B51 for <tsvwg@ietf.org>; Tue, 12 May 2020 08:39:42 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail.eggert.org (mail.eggert.org [91.190.195.94]) by fgw21.mail.saunalahti.fi (Halon) with ESMTPSA id cae318a9-9466-11ea-9eb8-005056bdd08f; Tue, 12 May 2020 18:39:40 +0300 (EEST)
Received: from [IPv6:2a00:ac00:0:35:b40d:fd5f:e740:30a5] (unknown [IPv6:2a00:ac00:0:35:b40d:fd5f:e740:30a5]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail.eggert.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id C0EC41AE8A3F for <tsvwg@ietf.org>; Tue, 12 May 2020 18:39:30 +0300 (EEST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=eggert.org; s=dkim; t=1589297970; bh=i3CT+WsVdIINHBCwoOspdR5wqd/8oRqBxZIgqAwF+BM=; h=From:Subject:Date:In-Reply-To:Cc:References; b=XulZ7JLP9JeVaRHoTxUrNkRWy38HBux/UtYn4wm4UWqhgFqx5bB5sEBF4ffRflfU6 2wMItNlhk0qdSzE7VqsLWfgJXUmAfp8Lh4xHD+wjHQAx0mfJvhHf7HiRFsjAZ5ERQd URJKrildfmqKZBafOzujFzEqAEX0XSk7y0y3aGVw=
From: Lars Eggert <lars@eggert.org>
Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="Apple-Mail=_FE05D7CF-F485-4DD3-A682-06A58E8B4FB4"; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; micalg="pgp-sha512"
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 13.4 \(3608.80.23.2.2\))
Date: Tue, 12 May 2020 18:39:28 +0300
In-Reply-To: <CADVnQy=7cLap5DEfMgwqpRBr7aorngwHfJsiEPF_QoTkyiOU0A@mail.gmail.com>
Cc: "tsvwg@ietf.org" <tsvwg@ietf.org>
References: <46720ce0-ffcb-e97f-3e2d-6b5274b73b15@mti-systems.com> <ECABE66C-7855-4727-A14D-404D36BAF77F@cablelabs.com> <CADVnQy=7cLap5DEfMgwqpRBr7aorngwHfJsiEPF_QoTkyiOU0A@mail.gmail.com>
Message-Id: <01F2E1EA-1B97-4875-A057-61F10BB8CE07@eggert.org>
X-MailScanner-ID: C0EC41AE8A3F.A46DC
X-MailScanner: Found to be clean
X-MailScanner-From: lars@eggert.org
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/tsvwg/ZOqCmTEeeQ8Y0iMV_-rx_K70H2g>
Subject: Re: [tsvwg] Consensus call on ECT(1)
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: Tue, 12 May 2020 15:39:44 -0000

On 2020-5-5, at 14:47, Neal Cardwell <ncardwell=40google.com@dmarc.ietf.org> wrote:
> I support using ECT(1) as an input signal to the network. (Option 1).

+1

Lars

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email