IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [tsvwg] The List (of application-layer desired features)

William Chan (陈智昌) <willchan@google.com> Wed, 28 August 2013 09:53 UTC

Return-Path: <willchan@google.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 12CED21E805A for <tsvwg@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 28 Aug 2013 02:53:56 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.677
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.677 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, FM_FORGED_GMAIL=0.622, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, MIME_8BIT_HEADER=0.3, NO_RELAYS=-0.001]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id Nf-GC2CSEF+o for <tsvwg@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 28 Aug 2013 02:53:55 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-ie0-x229.google.com (mail-ie0-x229.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4001:c03::229]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7442721E804E for <tsvwg@ietf.org>; Wed, 28 Aug 2013 02:53:55 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-ie0-f169.google.com with SMTP id 10so8601031ied.0 for <tsvwg@ietf.org>; Wed, 28 Aug 2013 02:53:55 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:reply-to:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id :subject:from:to:cc:content-type; bh=AEMbHpptqq7uDe4eyZL/vCIsk7vrqggemHepPP+i7fM=; b=FAo0FbIXbJ3jP/bAIrfykmK+T0fdexbIaQf2Sr+QuFssHwZqgCwFD8jo6alUwinc+A ZL/nXzwoVVq4tzoGWF32QSQOfnY4OXv6C908kEADZUwmIiw/vpmOtAWb4yfJ66MzXvhK 4UlnLichhM2rXaxng8jPtVSEgrKukKhSkgFV2ITAMJD6o1RdXkNZCFOGbBwYT5O3gkyB OcoC8cS+kTlVdJT8xzOQ+e54RJ87Fu0viQiCNIqz0YQFtai3MUy7GnikMf/Jnz6hYKbs N69FIaUb9XxrD+Vz/76LAChgkuUJAPEsiPDEJfQNWGZaON5EHZ5DsuFotlQzk8i48XA6 t+cA==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=20120113; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:reply-to:in-reply-to:references :date:message-id:subject:from:to:cc:content-type; bh=AEMbHpptqq7uDe4eyZL/vCIsk7vrqggemHepPP+i7fM=; b=e9Aa8JpKnUZlHu7xcFPM9mB53IYbprUji5IXg5jZjDQleSiYkylgi+i4jV0cc+74D+ L1PTYWWZ3uNgiCKeGunZppjAbe3Ac2oVLYGbJW6Ilr1mfQAAq90QQGTBd7eES2Pb1oNh F/EW7qPxqGfo9Skih2NOGQZZ6OdymlxDSh280i5AyiDbJodRv27rOYnK49nA6r9XacBX uDB7mRT4Eh2dL79hlN7HTsmjyTVamCDA2eCGR6DXTZgAOKY7n9gtyqbxHv22GhYzdISj m0EoZF9KcPkXbrPQesKPnJwJYbygoDIW3KJ5R0nrI5hKmakqyiP9+Tml+wEM1tKpRcf0 ExIw==
X-Gm-Message-State: ALoCoQmWZC1baNyP8ZipjV6mLUZBbmuUYKR7HKFKBnNI7cq3og6/VmU7ig9cECIlqnGqWfydzGnp+SYUBbBOPnRT9dRBnN8NOkvMHiHZ8e4BWmawE0f2CluuSYR+TAKi2QLUtNFM3D7hRIMGiYlhXNn+6uXl5xlymvw6W9Bd7rWxjBgJRXXZPXS1QVG6bTIx//F0ws8+XidS
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Received: by 10.50.50.104 with SMTP id b8mr12101614igo.1.1377683634932; Wed, 28 Aug 2013 02:53:54 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by 10.231.69.132 with HTTP; Wed, 28 Aug 2013 02:53:54 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by 10.231.69.132 with HTTP; Wed, 28 Aug 2013 02:53:54 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <2ADDC87F-8E20-4D7D-B0A0-20CE3DD12B81@ifi.uio.no>
References: <CAP+FsNeMqB0+igBZjjsT-Xb+17YdUyptBJ2N0x9_jaaLYzKisQ@mail.gmail.com> <CAP+FsNcvR5q3N2iLv6wM6LQXS72sg1pdvTWdU9rsSFAP8OHpwA@mail.gmail.com> <4613980CFC78314ABFD7F85CC302772111B7D710@IL-EX10.ad.checkpoint.com> <CABaLYCuom7VH+9VJrbe7-D+S7YfGtbS59ne5fG03Zrm=U5tc0Q@mail.gmail.com> <081D0F76-F4AE-42D5-B354-795BE4910D23@lurchi.franken.de> <2ADDC87F-8E20-4D7D-B0A0-20CE3DD12B81@ifi.uio.no>
Date: Wed, 28 Aug 2013 17:53:54 +0800
Message-ID: <CAA4WUYhK4TQNsYiemfDq5xVtxtmPV=suqteRUkb11r43ZxRHAA@mail.gmail.com>
From: "William Chan (陈智昌)" <willchan@google.com>
To: Michael Welzl <michawe@ifi.uio.no>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="089e01183d16ac8b4b04e4fef70a"
X-Mailman-Approved-At: Wed, 28 Aug 2013 11:49:11 -0700
Cc: Michael Tuexen <Michael.Tuexen@lurchi.franken.de>, "tsvwg@ietf.org" <tsvwg@ietf.org>, Yoav Nir <ynir@checkpoint.com>, Mike Belshe <mike@belshe.com>, HTTP Working Group <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
Subject: Re: [tsvwg] The List (of application-layer desired features)
X-BeenThere: tsvwg@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
Reply-To: willchan@google.com
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: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/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, 28 Aug 2013 09:53:56 -0000

On Aug 28, 2013 4:01 PM, "Michael Welzl" <michawe@ifi.uio.no> wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> I agree 100% with Michael Tuexen here... just one thing, in line:
>
>
>>> You're right, SCTP is non-deployable, which makes it a non-starter.
 SCTP also does not address handshake issues or TLS issues.
>>
>> I agree that SCTP over IP can't be deployed now due to missing NAT
support.
>
>
> Indeed that's not an argument against SCTP/UDP/IP, but I also wonder why,
instead of saying "can't be deployed", people don't just go ahead and use
it whenever it's there and works, with a fall-back to TCP? This could be
done with (this version of) Happy Eyeballs:
> http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-wing-tsvwg-happy-eyeballs-sctp-02
>
> Good reasons against doing this are... what? Anyone?

Implementation usefulness. Why bother adding code that barely gets used
(and that is unlikely to improve in the near future), adds complexity, code
bloat, etc...?

SCTP/UDP has a much higher likelihood of usefulness. But as Roberto has
mentioned, it still has deficiencies, mostly around RTTs (connection + DTLS
setup). If they can be fixed, great. Let's do it.

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email