Re: [tsvwg] Question about proper node behavior -ECN

Jonathan Morton <chromatix99@gmail.com> Mon, 22 May 2023 06:09 UTC

Return-Path: <chromatix99@gmail.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 1F61EC1782C4 for <tsvwg@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sun, 21 May 2023 23:09:26 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -6.848
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.848 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, FREEMAIL_ENVFROM_END_DIGIT=0.25, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, RCVD_IN_ZEN_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=unavailable autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([50.223.129.194]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id x6VYikO5TiWm for <tsvwg@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sun, 21 May 2023 23:09:21 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-lf1-x136.google.com (mail-lf1-x136.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4864:20::136]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 (128/128 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id C13ACC16B5CF for <tsvwg@ietf.org>; Sun, 21 May 2023 23:09:21 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-lf1-x136.google.com with SMTP id 2adb3069b0e04-4f2676d62a2so6137886e87.0 for <tsvwg@ietf.org>; Sun, 21 May 2023 23:09:21 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20221208; t=1684735760; x=1687327760; h=to:references:message-id:content-transfer-encoding:cc:date :in-reply-to:from:subject:mime-version:from:to:cc:subject:date :message-id:reply-to; bh=sku7S3tjFj9bU/Rj8cHhFmEIF3C/8Ydu2gIa2ovIMhg=; b=YycVQze7fj4ejfqpAg1DEag60SzEcy2Xj7irQmMWRmVF4HDiizaoLL6FBc3V7gyj/I 2s8E7bD9PeSsSTSrIJ9fa6JMA31snadDcOfETLU0xSZMvCKZ2pEzBGY0RknQYSf6yHMR Fw4uwXmmxEaMDFfPYWa2OJsBR8WcHrBk9cSAYfJuAFgT3gb9+DrMAyhNlROy/Gl1/Xlq vNOI8QA13v8oyn1gKjhzvsnYk0a/4OuRpcYnwYb93fBmaWVRbinocDysfuWGdBuCPDUM NuWXWkuoIxUXSQVP58NV2CLeUOTUcQ48nMhhfsS0q7HVpxrWb9tB0wi0SEb9T7LoPByE uksA==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20221208; t=1684735760; x=1687327760; h=to:references:message-id:content-transfer-encoding:cc:date :in-reply-to:from:subject:mime-version:x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc :subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=sku7S3tjFj9bU/Rj8cHhFmEIF3C/8Ydu2gIa2ovIMhg=; b=MIyMXMSFLSnri46nw55TBuJMH9Oroxs8VtYFJZWFkkiYfD71QuKNNeYrGVmmVNMPrw xBhpj/nr4NrWmrPaVRfy6Dz/rwRayXu1TtaW/1xVcL7P/9VdgiqX2vADPTvJPvwbKggL 4cBLF4L2JLUtc3pBvmhFWUbWZUKsqfbTPlskJUk8HsiJ2a6TBh6Kr/NO/kk/xWN/8ga7 HEKp9/Cd1WqhL2WrTaEn/B+0oY7Z1cm022zxIVjNLRBET4EAjUzWdpKNxn5JHMDCBD7i EBSU1WRzhw9rej0gv4jtXVELNohFmPMXfTzU1sgLdb63/voVnmwF18HVk/dR5Jvru+9a uF4A==
X-Gm-Message-State: AC+VfDwYwWffkmlZmlpjj1Dy1Et9twqZDfCiuyahg9m7hBGEv7FWkddC toD887iEikp3AL+TlWiBiFIsPhhueGjzAg==
X-Google-Smtp-Source: ACHHUZ4/zJ8Yunp7MWEn7YFrHp8zNbLYjjcuO0KpYRJtZO9HNrSkvMo9iSNZXYLe86y6WQS0mW2P1g==
X-Received: by 2002:ac2:5de8:0:b0:4f1:3bd7:e53a with SMTP id z8-20020ac25de8000000b004f13bd7e53amr3147217lfq.49.1684735759532; Sun, 21 May 2023 23:09:19 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from smtpclient.apple (178-55-29-93.bb.dnainternet.fi. [178.55.29.93]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id j5-20020ac253a5000000b004e887fd71acsm848054lfh.236.2023.05.21.23.09.18 (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-ECDSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Sun, 21 May 2023 23:09:19 -0700 (PDT)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 14.0 \(3654.100.0.2.22\))
From: Jonathan Morton <chromatix99@gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <AM8PR07MB8137457AD91C0907BEFB3640C2439@AM8PR07MB8137.eurprd07.prod.outlook.com>
Date: Mon, 22 May 2023 09:09:17 +0300
Cc: Greg White <g.white=40cablelabs.com@dmarc.ietf.org>, Gorry Fairhurst <gorry@erg.abdn.ac.uk>, Ingemar Johansson S <ingemar.s.johansson=40ericsson.com@dmarc.ietf.org>, "tsvwg@ietf.org" <tsvwg@ietf.org>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-Id: <D2E87232-23C3-4D5C-99E7-6C48B04E14ED@gmail.com>
References: <AM8PR07MB81377925B14E2E876D921417C27E9@AM8PR07MB8137.eurprd07.prod.outlook.com> <68d6e42a-cce7-221f-0a36-f4c63fb3d371@erg.abdn.ac.uk> <49279148-6C36-49BB-9AE1-E25139704164@cablelabs.com> <0DB8B92E-744A-4811-8BF1-6B045F2D41EE@gmail.com> <AM8PR07MB8137457AD91C0907BEFB3640C2439@AM8PR07MB8137.eurprd07.prod.outlook.com>
To: Ingemar Johansson S <ingemar.s.johansson@ericsson.com>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3654.100.0.2.22)
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/tsvwg/mUtxoBjhKOlZxxoKEpwXGD3UaXo>
Subject: Re: [tsvwg] Question about proper node behavior -ECN
X-BeenThere: tsvwg@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.39
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: Mon, 22 May 2023 06:09:26 -0000

> On 22 May, 2023, at 9:05 am, Ingemar Johansson S <ingemar.s.johansson@ericsson.com> wrote:
> 
> I believe that it pretty much explains that Not-ECT should not be changed to any of the other ECN code points in a network.
> 
> ECT(0) to ECT(1) is an open question as I see it but I guess that it is safe to state that network nodes that are to comply to RFC9331 should not implement such behavior ?

I think that's a safe assumption, yes.  Absent some concrete reason to do so, network nodes should only be changing ECT(0) or ECT(1) to CE, for the purpose of congestion signalling; no other change to the ECN field is expected to occur.

 - Jonathan Morton