Looking at this takes me back.
The format of the references is not one I have seen in a long time, likewise the running footing, the front matter and the placing of the Abstract while Terminology is also from a bygone age. Ah, I see that the I-D is a decade old - all is explained but I do think that an update is called for.
Tom Petch
________________________________________
From: tcpm <tcpm-bounces@xxxxxxxx> on behalf of The IESG <iesg-secretary@xxxxxxxx>
Sent: 18 May 2020 15:15
To: IETF-Announce
Cc: tcpm@xxxxxxxx; draft-ietf-tcpm-rto-consider@xxxxxxxx; tcpm-chairs@xxxxxxxx
Subject: [tcpm] Last Call: <draft-ietf-tcpm-rto-consider-14.txt> (Requirements for Time-Based Loss Detection) to Best Current Practice
The IESG has received a request from the TCP Maintenance and Minor Extensions
WG (tcpm) to consider the following document: - 'Requirements for Time-Based
Loss Detection'
<draft-ietf-tcpm-rto-consider-14.txt> as Best Current Practice
The IESG plans to make a decision in the next few weeks, and solicits final
comments on this action. Please send substantive comments to the
last-call@xxxxxxxx mailing lists by 2020-06-01. Exceptionally, comments may
be sent to iesg@xxxxxxxx instead. In either case, please retain the beginning
of the Subject line to allow automated sorting.
Abstract
Many protocols must detect packet loss for various reasons (e.g., to
ensure reliability using retransmissions or to understand the level
of congestion along a network path). While many mechanisms have
been designed to detect loss, protocols ultimately can only count on
the passage of time without delivery confirmation to declare a
packet "lost". Each implementation of a time-based loss detection
mechanism represents a balance between correctness and timeliness
and therefore no implementation suits all situations. This document
provides high-level requirements for time-based loss detectors
appropriate for general use in the Internet. Within the
requirements, implementations have latitude to define particulars
that best address each situation.
The file can be obtained via
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-tcpm-rto-consider/
No IPR declarations have been submitted directly on this I-D.
_______________________________________________
tcpm mailing list
tcpm@xxxxxxxx
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tcpm
--
last-call mailing list
last-call@xxxxxxxx
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/last-call
