[tsvwg] L4S work in TSVWG

Wesley Eddy <wes@mti-systems.com> Tue, 07 February 2017 04:13 UTC

Return-Path: <wes@mti-systems.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 1100612996B for <tsvwg@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 6 Feb 2017 20:13:37 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.599
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=mti-systems-com.20150623.gappssmtp.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 k1trmTtsADpS for <tsvwg@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 6 Feb 2017 20:13:35 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail-qk0-x229.google.com (mail-qk0-x229.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:400d:c09::229]) (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 AB0D0129969 for <tsvwg@ietf.org>; Mon, 6 Feb 2017 20:13:35 -0800 (PST)
Received: by mail-qk0-x229.google.com with SMTP id 11so76767498qkl.3 for <tsvwg@ietf.org>; Mon, 06 Feb 2017 20:13:35 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=mti-systems-com.20150623.gappssmtp.com; s=20150623; h=to:from:subject:message-id:date:user-agent:mime-version :content-transfer-encoding; bh=/7FiZvBXpJx6uwq8oJ/QffUvbLyegSGoFjSapByxCVA=; b=FuvL/D68Zang6uKMpbSm/dDHUyLe1qjhFCL3xECt+jAbzHeWtPh6lbvOovfCiu/IX0 /8991Ub3R6vwk6Wci13B5PW8TUHgBlN76Ty3BegGydG5j5DHRyhXiXqi/RV1u0RS/hQ3 hNH8nSaqOQito2xoZnUlhPn9JkYOCAOkJ0eiKuI8ThJRklHjMCu6VkMpGYnjwBVXCExx R0pSdiJ1gkAHz/S/fRlZBpmSPAR6EJh5QVYTn33OK0wpE3dSrIwAkwJNhga/xwHfHzom GpM2F69KL/3EmZtrQ1vMTF0JmVmrZG+WuHcvsNExEavAlymIeQ+yiiuGSVWgtCf443Vc vFRA==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:to:from:subject:message-id:date:user-agent :mime-version:content-transfer-encoding; bh=/7FiZvBXpJx6uwq8oJ/QffUvbLyegSGoFjSapByxCVA=; b=pAVNBR82cqxWCtD3v9HmKarXxQ9x3oQ6Mpe/P3V+JQCbNqZIKFIf5/tIkVU+bnWTPz eFGhT4BAgKh50rWCuJrcxvVU5y/3RmIGapyIjdPbTciN3LSj+Yw1ZZ/zhsTJCYvdZ7X7 06pYyKE2f9HAlUj3Xx5isMAGfMpDSY6r+di+gROKCKIbxBexq+Ba3koMjj3SSngZl8Ja 0KexzOWIyemrKakw+oR1esZGsJYvvbWJ/49Sjg8UpsmKKYBl9MnS9OGGFbLCbEpKOfPA 32C452zX6DtMAmUavTQe7PFEcvdyRf/OpVEAt4FoEApye4/mp8UUWm7cMmhY9FjVkPtN 8Szw==
X-Gm-Message-State: AMke39kZZBnAWSbIfTVVH+CKffSGZaKX+v1wkmcZA8HbBRqHLlPQNzdWb9Xq5Y3PqFCNsQ==
X-Received: by 10.55.151.7 with SMTP id z7mr13455927qkd.316.1486440814671; Mon, 06 Feb 2017 20:13:34 -0800 (PST)
Received: from [172.20.0.116] ([63.139.220.94]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id r10sm2382345qte.1.2017.02.06.20.13.34 for <tsvwg@ietf.org> (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Mon, 06 Feb 2017 20:13:34 -0800 (PST)
To: "tsvwg@ietf.org" <tsvwg@ietf.org>
From: Wesley Eddy <wes@mti-systems.com>
Message-ID: <274f4ce5-d7da-75f3-5a84-751f87864962@mti-systems.com>
Date: Mon, 06 Feb 2017 23:13:32 -0500
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; WOW64; rv:45.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/45.7.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"; format="flowed"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/tsvwg/dly1hqOdWK6NyIHWLgA2REAuCYE>
Subject: [tsvwg] L4S work in TSVWG
X-BeenThere: tsvwg@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17
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, 07 Feb 2017 04:13:37 -0000

Hello, as a co-chair, I'm checking to make sure we have the critical 
mass to go forward with L4S in TSVWG.

Over time, there has been good discussion on this spread across several 
lists and groups (ICCRG, AQM, TCP-Prague, etc.).  The ADs have asked 
that going forward TSVWG be the home for this work, so I think we can 
limit discussion to TSVWG now (assuming relevant parties are on-list).

The three documents at present around this are:

1. https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-briscoe-tsvwg-l4s-arch-00

2. https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-briscoe-tsvwg-aqm-dualq-coupled-00

3. https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-briscoe-tsvwg-ecn-l4s-id-02

There was interest in working these in TSVWG at the last IETF meeting 
(noted in the minutes), and we want that discussion to continue on the 
mailing list.

Please respond if you're interested in participating in this work by 
helping to review, analyze, implement, test, simulate, deploy, etc. and 
agree that TSVWG should add milestones on the L4S problem, based on the 
current drafts.  Or if you have other thoughts, those would be 
interesting too.

Thanks!