* WGs marked with an * asterisk has had at least one new draft made available during the last 5 days

Tcpm Status Pages

TCP Maintenance and Minor Extensions (Active WG)
Tsv Area: Martin Duke, Magnus Westerlund | 2004-Feb-05 —  
Chairs
 
 
 


IETF-109 tcpm minutes

Session 2020-11-17 1200-1400: Room 8 - tcpm chatroom

Minutes

minutes-109-tcpm-00 minutes



          TCPM meeting, IETF-109, online
          
          Tuesday, November 17, 05:00 - 07:00 UTC (120 mins)
          Note Taker: Gorry Fairhurst
          
          
          WG Status updates
          -------------------------------------------------
          
          Current work items were reviewed.
          
          Lars: We started work on revising the cubic RFC 8312 to align with Linux,
          and
          would like to hear from other implementations.
          Please interact in the github repro.
          
          
          Working Group Items
          -------------------------------------------------
          
          * Updates to draft-ietf-tcpm-yang-tcp-00
            https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-tcpm-yang-tcp-00
            Speaker: Mahesh Jethanandani
          
            Looking at implementations in Linux.
            Milestone suggested as April 2021.
          
          * More Accurate ECN Feedback in TCP
            https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-tcpm-accurate-ecn-13
            Speaker: Bob Briscoe
          
            Michael Scharf: I agree to the current encoding proposal.
            But I think there are tradeoffs in using the different encodings and
            not all
            aspects have been presented. I'll follow-up on the list.
            Gorry: I will follow-up on-list regarding the new ACK Filtering text.
            I think this needs a little more work, which should be done quickly.
          
          * ECN++: Adding Explicit Congestion Notification
            https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-tcpm-generalized-ecn-06
            Speaker: Bob Briscoe
          
            No questions.
          
          * RFC 793bis
            https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-tcpm-rfc793bis-19
            Speaker: Wesley Eddy
          
            Bob Briscoe: On RFC5681 ... why do you say the baseline CC needs to
            be in
            the spec (E.g. in a lightweight implementation)?
            Martin: Why do we say this?
            Wes: RFC1122 says use Reno.
            Martin: I will think.
            Jana: I would recommend we move away from specifying Reno just because
            it
            was in the original spec.
            Wes: I think we ought to say an IETF-specified CC.
            Martin: +1
            Jana: I would push back. I don't yet see a set of good principles for
            what a
            CC needs. I would personally allow other CCs, even outside the RFC
            series.
          
          Other Items
          -------------------------------------------------
          
          * TCP ACK Rate Request
            Speaker: Carles Gomez
            https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-gomez-tcpm-ack-rate-request-01
          
            Jonathan: I think that the use of N field and the reorder flag are
            orthogonal
            based on value of R field.  Both could be overlaid on the same byte.
            Continue discussion on the list.
          
          * TCP ETS: Extensible Timestamps in Microseconds and Network RTT
          Measurements
            https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-yang-tcpm-ets-00
            Speaker: Kevin Yang
          
            Richard Scheffenegger: The SYN option could be much more
            space-efficient.
            It could be an extension to TS differentiated by the length field.
            Bob Briscoe: +1
            Vidhi Goel: Good work, and delayed ACK should be done, what is the
            use case?
            Congestion control?
            Praveen: Delayed ACK is useful in DC, not sure this needs to be
            combined
            with TS.
          
          * Update on MPTCP RobE
            https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-amend-tcpm-mptcp-robe
            Speaker: Jiao Kang and Markus Amend
          
            Chairs: Does the IPR allow implementation in an Open Source
            implementation?
            Please take to mailing list.
            Lars: If you open source the code that will be good. I think the
            question is
            whether others can implement the spec based on the spec without a
            licence?
          
          * Progress for Accurate Data Scheduling by Server in MPTCP
            https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-kang-tcpm-accurate-data-scheduling-by-server-01
          
            Speaker: Jiao Kang
          
            No questions.
          
          * Fault Management Enhancement in MPTCP
            https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-kang-tcpm-fault-management-in-mptcp-session-00
          
            Speaker: Jiao Kang
          
            Yoshifumi: Clients can know the failures in subflows from ICMP or reset
            or timeout. What's the use case for this proposal?
            Jiao: Sever sides can collect info from multiple connections, hence
            have better
            understanding of the network status than single client.
            Yoshifumi: It would be better to clarify it in next version of the
            draft.
            Jiao: We will.
          
          * RFC 6937bis
            https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-mathis-tcpm-rfc6937bis-00
            Speaker: Matt Mathis
          
            Richard Scheffenegger: I like this work and the plan to move to PRR
            to PS.
            FreeBSD is doing a form of PRR from a few weeks ago.
            Jonathon M: What about ECN?
            Matt: Linux CWR code use a form of PRR. We expect ECN discussion,
            but do not
            plan major changes when advancing this along the standards track.
            Praveen: Is there more about Policers?
            Matt: Policing is still prevalent, and being introduced in new places
            in
            the Southern Hemisphere.
            Jana: PRR is a form of soft pacing. I think that pacing is being used
            by
            default, and its value with pacing. I am also interested in how the
            two might
            interact?
            Matt: The way they implement the timestamps per packet might influence
            the
            answer.
            Yuchung: When you see ACKs, when there re stretch-ACKs the burst needs
            to be
            handled by pacing - which depends on cwnd (when there is no ACK clock).
            Jana: I agree, I think we need to explain the extra benefit that PRR
            brings.
            Chairs: I see interest, let's see if there is support for this on the
            list.
          
          * TCPLS
            Speaker: Olivier Bonaventure
            Paper to be published
          
            Jana: How does this work with terminating connections in a middlebox?
            Olivier: You can detect the presence of a proxy.
            Jana: I understand. If I try to negotiate with a TLS endpoint this is a
            different entity.
            Olivier: You could look at the TCP sequence numbers and use the TLS
            info to
            find the existence of the proxy.
            Yoshifumi: How do you wish to proceed in the IETF?
            O: We first try to understand cases where the two protocols bring
            benefit.
            We can offer a way to exchange reliable transport options using TLS,
            and
            get new opportunities.
          
            Meeting ended.
          
          



Generated from PyHt script /wg/tcpm/minutes.pyht Latest update: 24 Oct 2012 16:51 GMT -