On 4/11/17 9:18 AM, Nico Williams wrote: > One could give a lot of advice for design of protocols with > "friendly" middle boxes. Merely saying "hey, they are good" is not > enough. We might want to revisit end-to-end protocol design as well > (e.g., maybe ICMP isn't working so well; what can we do?). There have been a number of efforts to provide mechanisms for applications to communicate explicitly with middleboxes. None has gotten any traction, and for the moment it looks like anything that requires changes to middleboxes along those lines is unlikely to be successful. That said: > IMO the IETF must not publish draft-dolson-plus-middlebox-benefits as > it is today. No, clearly not. I'm actually not sure I see a lot of benefit to publishing a more balanced document, either, in the sense that it's not likely to lead anybody to do anything differently. Melinda
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature