IMHO:
Just write down the current status of QUIC: Support and understanding of QUIC
in next-gen security devices is in its infancy, and so are details about the
test procedures in this document. Nevertheless, it is important enough that
it should not be ignored and is included as good as possible in the document.
Cheers
Toerless
On Wed, Feb 02, 2022 at 08:14:50AM +0100, Carsten Rossenhoevel wrote:
> Dear Matt,
>
> Thank you for your review!
>
> We added QUIC to the draft during one of the BMWG sessions based on
> suggestions from the attendees. The authors are a bit unsure how to fix the
> draft that's up for approval so that it would be precise and fully compliant
> with QUIC environments.
>
> Do you have any specific suggestions how to correct the text, keeping QUIC
> in scope?
>
> Alternatively, we could remove QUIC references and take it out of scope and
> cover it in a future amendment. Not the best solution, but after more than
> three years of drafting with so many contributors, we would like to avoid
> opening a new discussion area that would likely delay the work by another
> year.
>
> Best regards, Carsten
>
>
> Am 2/1/2022 um 5:40 PM schrieb Matt Joras via Datatracker:
> > Reviewer: Matt Joras
> > Review result: Ready with Issues
> >
> > I am the assigned Gen-ART reviewer for this draft. The General Area
> > Review Team (Gen-ART) reviews all IETF documents being processed
> > by the IESG for the IETF Chair. Please wait for direction from your
> > document shepherd or AD before posting a new version of the draft.
> >
> > For more information, please see the FAQ at
> >
> > <https://trac.ietf.org/trac/gen/wiki/GenArtfaq>.
> >
> > Document: draft-ietf-bmwg-ngfw-performance-13
> > Reviewer: Matt Joras
> > Review Date: 2022-01-31
> > IETF LC End Date: 2021-12-29
> > IESG Telechat date: 2022-02-03
> >
> > Nits/editorial comments:
> >
> > Section 4.3.1.1
> > This section details TCP stack attributes in great detail. However,
> > subsequently HTTP/3 and QUIC are both mentioned in 4.3.1.3.. QUIC is in need of
> > tuning just as much as TCP, if not more.
> >
> > " HTTP/3 emulated browser uses QUIC ([RFC9000]) as transport protocol." should
> > be reworded, and I'm not exactly sure what it is trying to convey.
> >
> > "Depending on test scenarios and selected HTTP version, HTTP header compression
> > MAY be set to enable or disable." should probably read " be enabled or
> > disabled."
> >
> > Similarly in sections 7, there is a lot of specific mention of TCP connections,
> > TCP RSTs, FINs, etc. and continued mentioning of HTTP. Since QUIC is a
> > significant carrier of HTTP traffic it seems these sections should not be so
> > specific to TCP. Especially since it seems as though for these kinds of devices
> > their limits may very well be different for UDP or TCP flows.
> >
> >
> --
> Carsten Rossenhövel
> Managing Director, EANTC AG (European Advanced Networking Test Center)
> Salzufer 14, 10587 Berlin, Germany
> office +49.30.3180595-21, fax +49.30.3180595-10, mobile +49.177.2505721
> cross@xxxxxxxx, https://www.eantc.de
>
> Place of Business/Sitz der Gesellschaft: Berlin, Germany
> Chairman/Vorsitzender des Aufsichtsrats: Herbert Almus
> Managing Directors/Vorstand: Carsten Rossenhövel, Gabriele Schrenk
> Registered: HRB 73694, Amtsgericht Charlottenburg, Berlin, Germany
> EU VAT No: DE812824025
>
> --
> last-call mailing list
> last-call@xxxxxxxx
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/last-call
--
---
tte@xxxxxxxxx
--
last-call mailing list
last-call@xxxxxxxx
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/last-call
