Re: [tsvwg] Status of ECN encapsulation drafts (i.e., stuck)

Sebastian Moeller <moeller0@gmx.de> Fri, 13 March 2020 22:54 UTC

Return-Path: <moeller0@gmx.de>
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 BBB583A11B0 for <tsvwg@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 13 Mar 2020 15:54:36 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.648
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.648 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, FREEMAIL_ENVFROM_END_DIGIT=0.25, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=no autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=gmx.net
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 0-s6YRBW2_kl for <tsvwg@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 13 Mar 2020 15:54:35 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mout.gmx.net (mout.gmx.net [212.227.15.15]) (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 DAEFE3A11AD for <tsvwg@ietf.org>; Fri, 13 Mar 2020 15:54:34 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=gmx.net; s=badeba3b8450; t=1584140069; bh=WqVRkGBwQAVQAje3nZ9RAG9us0FquySlnr2rj2p/oSI=; h=X-UI-Sender-Class:Subject:From:In-Reply-To:Date:Cc:References:To; b=kYjGsq8wJerbZZ57I+AhfmGhdDIQBpG+pHXND8W5k2+f8UvTYCju0ibpJh/2/6sOp vk+K1HYNanUMIqDzb/Szlh5Gl3UK7ibjLo3bUvpvWV5iBHDzv1+bXTSuuS8ehUSUwQ JBt+jt+i0Av4QbpLljICd8X4Slv/Y7aOp3tK5OBk=
X-UI-Sender-Class: 01bb95c1-4bf8-414a-932a-4f6e2808ef9c
Received: from hms-beagle2.lan ([77.1.19.106]) by mail.gmx.com (mrgmx005 [212.227.17.190]) with ESMTPSA (Nemesis) id 1M6lpM-1jEXd51N7O-008J5n; Fri, 13 Mar 2020 23:54:29 +0100
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 12.4 \(3445.104.11\))
From: Sebastian Moeller <moeller0@gmx.de>
In-Reply-To: <c802dddc-8a55-47ea-9976-06771d39c952@bobbriscoe.net>
Date: Fri, 13 Mar 2020 23:54:22 +0100
Cc: Jonathan Morton <chromatix99@gmail.com>, "tsvwg@ietf.org" <tsvwg@ietf.org>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-Id: <B3A657D0-EA9D-45EC-8003-21D158F83E06@gmx.de>
References: <CE03DB3D7B45C245BCA0D24327794936306F8925@MX307CL04.corp.emc.com> <2873ab79-19ad-0541-e3a4-d1d28dbc7ba0@bobbriscoe.net> <B6D58310-41E0-4172-B555-D28E7926A0B5@gmail.com> <3ee6e427-9dc9-e885-21a9-df9e35d99006@bobbriscoe.net> <C1696430-D2D2-48BB-AB17-EFB77EE474DE@gmail.com> <5d8f11f3-9def-14b1-4923-4eb02caf51eb@bobbriscoe.net> <50B14177-EB29-4273-839C-D22CCC47511E@gmail.com> <4f66ba3e-9eed-03cd-7f45-a1d7d10ec697@bobbriscoe.net> <FF777393-47B2-4B53-AD41-5883B2D67CC5@gmail.com> <264398ad-59eb-7cfd-0276-35ae0f0120a5@bobbriscoe.net> <44EB050C-C35C-47A0-BC78-3EEDB683B507@gmail.com> <c802dddc-8a55-47ea-9976-06771d39c952@bobbriscoe.net>
To: Bob Briscoe <ietf@bobbriscoe.net>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3445.104.11)
X-Provags-ID: V03:K1:sliS+EVMh3jJLSlJnj2FevqQN3gSLjDnutv7WAH7yCmzDdoZaej 3POC27XuOharrkaI1pn5sExhocfbQWXTRT903E5lK0lEhLNMGCRdyRSzsINak6otSATObJe vZZ1FLWygSaT9fDJugfQ4LPxeDkJlsefKm+suNlXkSPA+97h/4Ut/lts2whgoz+A1zWwBH1 HKb3fYMRK/hUKDqbdWafQ==
X-UI-Out-Filterresults: notjunk:1;V03:K0:owFTt/avdxs=:HM3l8FllP5ifAhmkEB9mkq ZcXy3vHArNKd0i4X57uHl0WvGLRsjnic+GR/VU3FUFNklK4X2raWR9Emjriged8SW+TGILuaG VgLhn98hgqaV+6iR3EtrHDUUHu9Mm+7abNAN6lh50RtJbff2WNjzSxRV9FXgkz8cviPFpP8+e ZyOGimmEmvyKF/LGTuJI8zxEMaOLJTNGsi+YOxQy58QtQcffum/eWS8rusUUNmokvw/mi4hDK 2Tck2QlNT4sCVwMHQPZDj+BwqLnZr7rpUxF5HijTR+90Y64Q4WgLZatl3va4ebq5TKz9WaNbI pEu71atyz0TmuNIhbRhuZFVnnj0/EVNLoPBeXahILcl9WgHqih47u34d2AeKaPyxsWm3TwQgM XPbQo746dBPGnshmguGnloiRDSNSIzO7Wem+GIw2rF5Qa9sayL8B/EGVvgjmawr1zb2KiPnN5 YJDJFlR+FDjYNayN0fVuQRt5rsUQ+fcE3Wykaxsyh6fmLIH4eQyKX2A/Hu+IZClnjIAbsgHKV TkrSKojzI+RfhfRO9HYoWQyCEwMOqwQ6OYoKjQ5WsjKrFJF3uvoVfmYcQRombCoS0LjC9pRUW baYxWmjtCZ79NxCbqZJExvihmGNbvkV+wBNL63BLdlwM+hSNsCcnAH+sfejofl0c4TUIoR7nt U8V0Z14lZHdDn/6n3cXAmKcfbytlt1hhstutF6om+ebs4uk9HXL72xwNrNSl7NCKlbYd+wfhc 1cPcelFt8F1hHmlITUdpJ1Iof3oyGsaK04DXLjwySrDN9Hapa3y2+i8/D4WkwBGzw2WIFn6mY qCBJ9SBTh5zSHzVMp8y6+Pv7tQJar85sDE1yXItEr9nYGecT3Gzap09oPad0VqPGGNKnszFR4 f1+e83xPqtk0sa2251Ad1DlNphChYbWNkWGN1IgmS0bTjCue1ElSfwcJP8IWX2HlUpYfJpgkM TDIYdlzBGkjJ/J7Zn8s9WKN7hr7OyyIqyxhJbNYdrLnqhMjfZN9wPBeKWlUm7pN/wz4l5hnNR FnuYKUVQ95Uqa+jEwcOo9KRFmH+ByYj3USPEypgScx8D6pz4MvyGtPh0umj0h6Pawp1V4Ahoc EGgWKo/eP4Te3jloaK1KnRu72vESwpdrVDhLJfj1Yt00917bvXPQ9ruMPvrlB2KWl+vyCYj50 ys9AXdXGYSYmRXlAEMC7qU8b69aSB/HnxITWkegbMtBJHtmTW5rGZn3wJZhffw/JIIJ/TmshO NQUCL2Ka6GkX3HAJv
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/tsvwg/jB-sNGEwxEvr9suC5OZu7X5MOe4>
Subject: Re: [tsvwg] Status of ECN encapsulation drafts (i.e., stuck)
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, 13 Mar 2020 22:54:37 -0000

Dear All,

so in this example we need an operator that operates a tunnel (encapsulation and decapsulation) and an AQM on the same tunnel and is considered to both (mis-)configure the tunnel to allow fragmentation and operate an SCE-AQM on hops along the tunnel's path. Is that really considered to be a sensible deployment that is worth catering to? I would guess having a tunnel that fragments/defragments alone would be painful/sub-optimal. Why would an operator that consciously accepted such a tunnel design (as there probably real world constraints that can justify such an arrangement) would then go and add a non-tunnel compatible AQM? Are fragmenting tunnels really such a big part of the commercial ISP world?


Best Regards
	Sebastian




> On Mar 13, 2020, at 19:50, Bob Briscoe <ietf@bobbriscoe.net> wrote:
> 
> Jonathan,
> 
> On 13/03/2020 18:15, Jonathan Morton wrote:
>>> On 13 Mar, 2020, at 7:58 pm, Bob Briscoe <ietf@bobbriscoe.net> wrote:
>>> 
>>> Are you reading my recent emails, or the main email?
>> The recent ones, because I'm trying to establish this fundamental point first.  Until I can figure out what you *do* mean by CE marks being doubled, there's no point in discussing anything more subtle.
>> 
>> So again, I ask: what context am I missing?
> I said "No." I.e. the AQM is not marking before the tunnel ingress. It is marking between tunnel ingress and egress.
> 
> How can I know what context you're missing if you haven't read the email? Presumably that means you're missing all the context given in the email.
> 
> Pls can you take these sort of emails off the IETF lists - I'm sure no-one cares for this sort of content-free conversation.
> 
> 
> Bob
>> 
>>  - Jonathan Morton
> 
> -- 
> ________________________________________________________________
> Bob Briscoe                               http://bobbriscoe.net/
>