Re: New I-D revision: TFRC with sender-RTT estimate - author position

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 




I'll try to respond to this on behalf of the authors, here is what I think:

* This seems a straight-forward piece of work that could be implemented quickly too. It has been raised before, but I think now would be an excellent time to progress this. It needs to be PS and should take one IETF-cycle.

* I believe the editors do have cycles to conclude this quickly over the next few months.

* I think this does still need some review from others - e.g. from the DCCP community; or/and RTP-based TFRC people to check the method seems correct, and to confirm people understand the "problem" cases that motivate the change. Comments are really welcome.

Gorry

---


Gerrit, Gorry: if there is support to take this forward, how close to ready would you think we are -- are there open issues? Would it be realistic to think about WGLC in about few months of time? With quick reading I couldn't identify any contentious issues in the draft, and I think it points out a relevant problem in TFRC that needs to be addressed.

Group: would you support this to become a DCCP working group item for a proposed standard RFC? I will assume that people who respond "Yes" are committing to participate in reviewing this and the subsequent versions of the draft.

- Pasi


On Aug 18, 2010, at 4:42 AM, Gorry Fairhurst wrote:

> Dear DCCP'ers.
>
> Gerrit has been working on improving the CCID-3 implementation in Linux, and this has raised the question of whether we can now progress the 'sender sends RTT estimate' option that was originally specified (and recommended) in RFC 5348 and which was submitted asdraft-renker-dccp-tfrc-rtt-option-00.txt, with accompanying slides for IETF-72 at:
>
>     https://wiki.tools.ietf.org/agenda/72/slides/dccp-3.pdf
>
> We therefore have uploaded
>
>     http://tools.ietf.org/id/draft-renker-dccp-tfrc-rtt-option-01.txt
>
> We'd like the WG to consider this minor, but important update as a suitable piece of work for standardisation - We believe it addresses several practical issues with the current DCCP CCID3/4 approach.
>
> Please read and send comments to the DCCP list.
>
> Best wishes,
>
> Gorry & Gerrit



[Index of Archives]     [Linux Kernel Development]     [Linux DCCP]     [IETF Annouce]     [Linux Networking]     [Git]     [Security]     [Linux Assembly]     [Bugtraq]     [Yosemite]     [MIPS Linux]     [ARM Linux]     [Linux Security]     [Linux RAID]     [Linux SCSI]     [DDR & Rambus]

  Powered by Linux