IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [tsvwg] A New Draft Uploaded (draft-qiang-tsvwg-udp-options-bounded-latency-00)

Joe Touch <touch@strayalpha.com> Fri, 08 March 2019 17:08 UTC

Return-Path: <touch@strayalpha.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 D62671313DC for <tsvwg@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 8 Mar 2019 09:08:55 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -0.92
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.92 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_INVALID=0.1, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, SPF_NEUTRAL=0.779] autolearn=no autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=fail (2048-bit key) reason="fail (body has been altered)" header.d=strayalpha.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 P4S6m70hZw4v for <tsvwg@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 8 Mar 2019 09:08:55 -0800 (PST)
Received: from server217-3.web-hosting.com (server217-3.web-hosting.com [198.54.115.226]) (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 25A111313D3 for <tsvwg@ietf.org>; Fri, 8 Mar 2019 09:08:55 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=strayalpha.com; s=default; h=Content-Type:In-Reply-To:MIME-Version:Date: Message-ID:From:References:Cc:To:Subject:Sender:Reply-To: Content-Transfer-Encoding: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=bb3LkiVQZwfJzLIEWyhFiGMvZtc/TUYyUwlcyq5b/JE=; b=i2TPIhgOiSx6VFh750yEO2S84 qmucmNgugDnjYBg0jh1PSADeFCezhSFXwTWNs0XwNYWaEIiarLORTWjijaj0LXFIjRCcJ0LAkbhEy mTdcIjbPXKsbXI3/mgBLQcjKpPCaTHPpLPqo6UtlBpuU/GRLFXu/Wn06V3I/ZNdJ2Ns/F5nT3eESe 1zC8CEjAAh90SUIC8TCgfAqk2pzsQYtMBfbt+KEP/LodZERzj8niiHX0wqeFGTRUQQ+BKYSLxC4j2 gH4ij6wI6tYUpj7qGYsC11syQbrrBTFjFtp+F05gwZ1XS0VbXwwTZsBRCcT3xy881VXr7B3VDou6c MaXdDCkAQ==;
Received: from cpe-172-250-240-132.socal.res.rr.com ([172.250.240.132]:51601 helo=[192.168.1.250]) by server217.web-hosting.com with esmtpsa (TLSv1.2:ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256:128) (Exim 4.91) (envelope-from <touch@strayalpha.com>) id 1h2IzI-001jRy-CA; Fri, 08 Mar 2019 12:08:49 -0500
To: "qiangli (D)" <qiangli3@huawei.com>, "gorry@erg.abdn.ac.uk" <gorry@erg.abdn.ac.uk>
Cc: Toerless Eckert <tte@cs.fau.de>, "tsvwg@ietf.org" <tsvwg@ietf.org>
References: <06C389826B926F48A557D5DB5A54C4ED45BE93CB@dggemi529-mbs.china.huawei.com> <0EA3C86F-B061-451D-A521-292728788B16@strayalpha.com> <5C82257F.5030505@erg.abdn.ac.uk> <06C389826B926F48A557D5DB5A54C4ED45BE97A1@dggemi529-mbs.china.huawei.com>
From: Joe Touch <touch@strayalpha.com>
Message-ID: <7d691ac5-3655-59ac-60cc-221b6a39717e@strayalpha.com>
Date: Fri, 08 Mar 2019 09:08:49 -0800
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; WOW64; rv:60.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/60.5.1
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <06C389826B926F48A557D5DB5A54C4ED45BE97A1@dggemi529-mbs.china.huawei.com>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="------------437D511ED7F0A542BB07264F"
Content-Language: en-US
X-OutGoing-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.0
X-AntiAbuse: This header was added to track abuse, please include it with any abuse report
X-AntiAbuse: Primary Hostname - server217.web-hosting.com
X-AntiAbuse: Original Domain - ietf.org
X-AntiAbuse: Originator/Caller UID/GID - [47 12] / [47 12]
X-AntiAbuse: Sender Address Domain - strayalpha.com
X-Get-Message-Sender-Via: server217.web-hosting.com: authenticated_id: touch@strayalpha.com
X-Authenticated-Sender: server217.web-hosting.com: touch@strayalpha.com
X-Source:
X-Source-Args:
X-Source-Dir:
X-From-Rewrite: unmodified, already matched
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/tsvwg/dqlJNeTxzTAqCslqbnNqcF7HVAI>
Subject: Re: [tsvwg] A New Draft Uploaded (draft-qiang-tsvwg-udp-options-bounded-latency-00)
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: Fri, 08 Mar 2019 17:08:56 -0000

Notes below...

On 3/8/2019 2:44 AM, qiangli (D) wrote:
>>> "One way to relieve in-transit rewriting is to pre-compute the sending
>     cycles along the way, then carry them with multiple SC options."
>
> The 2 bits' value will be changed/rewritten hop-by-hop, that is what we call " in-transit rewriting " ---- SWAP method
> We may use STACK method to reduce such " in-transit rewriting ". Will refine this part in 01 version. 

UDP options MUST NOT change in-transit. (anything that does change
in-transit would not be eligible for a UDP option KIND assignment).

So it would be useful for this rev to describe ONLY the case where it is
immutable.

>
>>> why it wouldn’t be sufficient to just request the next open value?
> The reason that why we wrote "127" is "127-253" is a reserved region defined in draft-ietf-tsvwg-udp-options-06, 

...

I'll note that "reserved" means you won't get those; they're set aside
for base protocol extensions (i.e., updates to the UDP option definition
itself, rather than individual options).

The values you want to request are from the "unassigned" range.

Joe

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email