On the Usage of Transport Features Provided by IETF Transport Protocols
draft-ietf-taps-transports-usage-09
Revision differences
Document history
Date | Rev. | By | Action |
---|---|---|---|
2018-01-05
|
09 | (System) | RFC Editor state changed to AUTH48-DONE from AUTH48 |
2017-12-18
|
09 | (System) | RFC Editor state changed to AUTH48 from RFC-EDITOR |
2017-12-11
|
09 | (System) | RFC Editor state changed to RFC-EDITOR from REF |
2017-12-04
|
09 | (System) | RFC Editor state changed to REF from EDIT |
2017-10-30
|
09 | (System) | RFC Editor state changed to EDIT |
2017-10-30
|
09 | (System) | IESG state changed to RFC Ed Queue from Approved-announcement sent |
2017-10-30
|
09 | (System) | Announcement was received by RFC Editor |
2017-10-27
|
09 | (System) | IANA Action state changed to No IC from In Progress |
2017-10-26
|
09 | (System) | IANA Action state changed to In Progress |
2017-10-26
|
09 | Cindy Morgan | IESG state changed to Approved-announcement sent from Approved-announcement to be sent::Point Raised - writeup needed |
2017-10-26
|
09 | Cindy Morgan | IESG has approved the document |
2017-10-26
|
09 | Cindy Morgan | Closed "Approve" ballot |
2017-10-26
|
09 | Cindy Morgan | Ballot approval text was generated |
2017-10-26
|
09 | Cindy Morgan | Ballot writeup was changed |
2017-10-26
|
09 | (System) | IANA Review state changed to Version Changed - Review Needed from IANA OK - No Actions Needed |
2017-10-26
|
09 | Michael Welzl | New version available: draft-ietf-taps-transports-usage-09.txt |
2017-10-26
|
09 | (System) | New version approved |
2017-10-26
|
09 | (System) | Request for posting confirmation emailed to previous authors: Michael Welzl , Michael Tuexen , Naeem Khademi |
2017-10-26
|
09 | Michael Welzl | Uploaded new revision |
2017-09-20
|
08 | Gunter Van de Velde | Closed request for Telechat review by OPSDIR with state 'No Response' |
2017-09-14
|
08 | Cindy Morgan | IESG state changed to Approved-announcement to be sent::Point Raised - writeup needed from Waiting for AD Go-Ahead |
2017-09-14
|
08 | Cindy Morgan | Changed consensus to Yes from Unknown |
2017-09-14
|
08 | Alvaro Retana | [Ballot Position Update] New position, No Objection, has been recorded for Alvaro Retana |
2017-09-14
|
08 | Benoît Claise | [Ballot comment] Interesting piece of work. Thanks. I hope it will be maintained along the time Acknowledgement: "The views expressed are solely those of the … [Ballot comment] Interesting piece of work. Thanks. I hope it will be maintained along the time Acknowledgement: "The views expressed are solely those of the author(s)." Really? Why this sentence? |
2017-09-14
|
08 | Benoît Claise | [Ballot Position Update] New position, No Objection, has been recorded for Benoit Claise |
2017-09-14
|
08 | Kathleen Moriarty | [Ballot Position Update] New position, No Objection, has been recorded for Kathleen Moriarty |
2017-09-14
|
08 | (System) | IESG state changed to Waiting for AD Go-Ahead from In Last Call |
2017-09-13
|
08 | Adam Roach | [Ballot Position Update] New position, No Objection, has been recorded for Adam Roach |
2017-09-13
|
08 | Suresh Krishnan | [Ballot Position Update] New position, No Objection, has been recorded for Suresh Krishnan |
2017-09-13
|
08 | Terry Manderson | [Ballot Position Update] New position, No Objection, has been recorded for Terry Manderson |
2017-09-13
|
08 | Deborah Brungard | [Ballot Position Update] New position, No Objection, has been recorded for Deborah Brungard |
2017-09-13
|
08 | Ben Campbell | [Ballot comment] Substantive: - General: There's a smattering of 2119 keywords in this draft. Other than when used in direct quotes,I assume they describe pre-existing … [Ballot comment] Substantive: - General: There's a smattering of 2119 keywords in this draft. Other than when used in direct quotes,I assume they describe pre-existing requirements. If so, then please use descriptive language without 2119 keywords. (Otherwise, see Ekr's comment.) -8, first paragraph: Doesn't QUIC provide those features "on its own"? I realize it is not in RFC form yet, but it is standards track. Editorial: - Abstract: The abstract should not contain citations. - 2, first paragraph: "This specification describes an (abstract) interface" Why is "abstract" in parentheses? - 3.1, definition of TFO, "allows to immediately hand over": I suggest either "allows to immediately hand over" or "allows the immediate handover". -3.4: I agree with other comments that the UDP/UDP-lite draft should be included here. There may have been reason to separate them at one time, but since they are progressing together it no longer seems to make sense. While it may be inconvenient to recombine them at this point, keeping them separate just pushes that inconvenience off on the readers. -4: I find this section very hard to read due to the formatting of the primitive descriptions. Please consider either using complete sentences, or reformatting them into something that looks less like a blob of text. |
2017-09-13
|
08 | Ben Campbell | [Ballot Position Update] New position, No Objection, has been recorded for Ben Campbell |
2017-09-13
|
08 | Alia Atlas | [Ballot Position Update] New position, No Objection, has been recorded for Alia Atlas |
2017-09-13
|
08 | Alexey Melnikov | [Ballot comment] I agree with Warren that a table for section 3 would be useful and with Mirja that draft-ietf-taps-transports-usage-udp should have been a part … [Ballot comment] I agree with Warren that a table for section 3 would be useful and with Mirja that draft-ietf-taps-transports-usage-udp should have been a part of this document. |
2017-09-13
|
08 | Alexey Melnikov | [Ballot Position Update] New position, Yes, has been recorded for Alexey Melnikov |
2017-09-12
|
08 | Warren Kumari | [Ballot comment] Comments and nits: 1: Abstract. "The description results in a set of transport abstractions that can be exported in a TAPS API." … [Ballot comment] Comments and nits: 1: Abstract. "The description results in a set of transport abstractions that can be exported in a TAPS API." What's a TAPS API? (please expand) 2: 3.1. Primitives Provided by TCP "Open: this is either active or passive" - "Open: This is either active or passive" (uppercase T)? 3: "Also optional, for multihomed hosts, the local IP address can be provided" This makes it sound ("Also optional") like the prior paragraph is optional. I don't think that that is intended -- perhaps (optional)? 4: "TCP implementations MUST NOT use TFO by default, but only use TFO if requested explicitly by the application on a per-service-port basis. more than TCP’s maximum segment size (minus options used in the SYN). " -- there is some broken fragment here. 5: "Send: this is the primitive that" - Uppercase 'T' ? Section 4.1. CONNECTION Related Primitives 6: "At least the Source Route option is mandatory for TCP to provide." -- perhaps for "TCP implementations to provide" 7: Section 5. Pass 3 This section is very helpful, but I was wondering if there might be a table published (not necessarily in the draft) which summarizes this info. E.g: | TCP | SCTCP | UDP | UDP-L | ----------------------------------------------+ Connect | X | X | X | X | Specify IP Options | X | | X | X | |
2017-09-12
|
08 | Warren Kumari | [Ballot Position Update] New position, No Objection, has been recorded for Warren Kumari |
2017-09-11
|
08 | Mirja Kühlewind | [Ballot comment] Fully editorial comments: - First paragraph in intro: s/underlying TAPS system/underlying Transport Services (TAPS) system/ - This should not use normative language: "TCP … [Ballot comment] Fully editorial comments: - First paragraph in intro: s/underlying TAPS system/underlying Transport Services (TAPS) system/ - This should not use normative language: "TCP implementations MUST NOT use TFO by default..." (see comment from EKR) - Also there is half a sentence missing in the same paragraph: "more than TCP's maximum segment size (minus options used in the SYN)." - s/Differentiated Services (diffuser)/Differentiated Services (diffserv)/ or s/Differentiated Services (diffuser)/Differentiated Services (DiffServ)/ - I (still) don't understand why draft-ietf-taps-transports-usage-udp was kept in a separate document, given there is even a separate empty section in this doc. You basically have to stop reading there, go to the other doc, read it, and come back. That doesn't make sense to me. |
2017-09-11
|
08 | Mirja Kühlewind | Ballot comment text updated for Mirja Kühlewind |
2017-09-11
|
08 | Mirja Kühlewind | [Ballot comment] Editorial comments: - First paragraph in intro: s/underlying TAPS system/underlying Transport Services (TAPS) system/ - This should not use normative language: "TCP implementations … [Ballot comment] Editorial comments: - First paragraph in intro: s/underlying TAPS system/underlying Transport Services (TAPS) system/ - This should not use normative language: "TCP implementations MUST NOT use TFO by default..." (see comment from EKR) - Also there is half a sentence missing in the same paragraph: "more than TCP's maximum segment size (minus options used in the SYN)." - s/Differentiated Services (diffuser)/Differentiated Services (diffserv)/ or s/Differentiated Services (diffuser)/Differentiated Services (DiffServ)/ - I (still) don't understand why draft-ietf-taps-transports-usage-udp was kept in a separate document, given there is even a separate empty section in this doc. You basically have to stop reading there, go to the other doc, read it, and come back. That doesn't make sense to me. |
2017-09-11
|
08 | Mirja Kühlewind | [Ballot Position Update] New position, No Objection, has been recorded for Mirja Kühlewind |
2017-09-11
|
08 | Eric Rescorla | [Ballot comment] I have not yet completed my review of this document, but I note that it is targeted for Informative but also contains RFC2119 … [Ballot comment] I have not yet completed my review of this document, but I note that it is targeted for Informative but also contains RFC2119 normative language, e.g., "TCP implementations MUST NOT use TFO by default, but only use TFO if requested explicitly by the application on a per-service-port basis." If the intent is that this is to be Informational then this should be removed, and if it's to be BCP, then it needs to go back to IETF-LC for that |
2017-09-11
|
08 | Eric Rescorla | Ballot comment text updated for Eric Rescorla |
2017-09-07
|
08 | (System) | IANA Review state changed to IANA OK - No Actions Needed from IANA - Review Needed |
2017-09-07
|
08 | Sabrina Tanamal | (Via drafts-lastcall@iana.org): IESG/Authors/WG Chairs: The IANA Services Operator has reviewed draft-ietf-taps-transports-usage-08, which is currently in Last Call, and has the following comments: We … (Via drafts-lastcall@iana.org): IESG/Authors/WG Chairs: The IANA Services Operator has reviewed draft-ietf-taps-transports-usage-08, which is currently in Last Call, and has the following comments: We understand that this document doesn't require any registry actions. While it's often helpful for a document's IANA Considerations section to remain in place upon publication even if there are no actions, if the authors strongly prefer to remove it, we do not object. If this assessment is not accurate, please respond as soon as possible. Thank you, Sabrina Tanamal IANA Services Specialist |
2017-09-06
|
08 | Tero Kivinen | Request for Telechat review by SECDIR Completed: Has Nits. Reviewer: Derrell Piper. |
2017-09-05
|
08 | Roni Even | Request for Telechat review by GENART Completed: Ready with Nits. Reviewer: Roni Even. Sent review to list. |
2017-09-04
|
08 | Spencer Dawkins | Ballot has been issued |
2017-09-04
|
08 | Spencer Dawkins | Ballot writeup was changed |
2017-09-04
|
08 | Spencer Dawkins | Ballot has been issued |
2017-09-04
|
08 | Spencer Dawkins | [Ballot Position Update] New position, Yes, has been recorded for Spencer Dawkins |
2017-09-04
|
08 | Spencer Dawkins | Created "Approve" ballot |
2017-09-04
|
08 | Spencer Dawkins | Ballot writeup was changed |
2017-09-04
|
08 | Gunter Van de Velde | Request for Telechat review by OPSDIR is assigned to Will LIU |
2017-09-04
|
08 | Gunter Van de Velde | Request for Telechat review by OPSDIR is assigned to Will LIU |
2017-08-31
|
08 | Tero Kivinen | Request for Telechat review by SECDIR is assigned to Derrell Piper |
2017-08-31
|
08 | Tero Kivinen | Request for Telechat review by SECDIR is assigned to Derrell Piper |
2017-08-31
|
08 | Jean Mahoney | Request for Telechat review by GENART is assigned to Roni Even |
2017-08-31
|
08 | Jean Mahoney | Request for Telechat review by GENART is assigned to Roni Even |
2017-08-31
|
08 | Cindy Morgan | IANA Review state changed to IANA - Review Needed |
2017-08-31
|
08 | Cindy Morgan | The following Last Call announcement was sent out (ends 2017-09-14): From: The IESG To: IETF-Announce CC: Zaheduzzaman.Sarker@ericsson.com, draft-ietf-taps-transports-usage@ietf.org, taps-chairs@ietf.org, Zaheduzzaman Sarker , … The following Last Call announcement was sent out (ends 2017-09-14): From: The IESG To: IETF-Announce CC: Zaheduzzaman.Sarker@ericsson.com, draft-ietf-taps-transports-usage@ietf.org, taps-chairs@ietf.org, Zaheduzzaman Sarker , taps@ietf.org, spencerdawkins.ietf@gmail.com Reply-To: ietf@ietf.org Sender: Subject: Last Call: (On the Usage of Transport Features Provided by IETF Transport Protocols) to Informational RFC The IESG has received a request from the Transport Services WG (taps) to consider the following document: - 'On the Usage of Transport Features Provided by IETF Transport Protocols' as Informational RFC 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 ietf@ietf.org mailing lists by 2017-09-14. Exceptionally, comments may be sent to iesg@ietf.org instead. In either case, please retain the beginning of the Subject line to allow automated sorting. Abstract This document describes how the transport protocols Transmission Control Protocol (TCP), MultiPath TCP (MPTCP), Stream Control Transmission Protocol (SCTP), User Datagram Protocol (UDP) and Lightweight User Datagram Protocol (UDP-Lite) expose services to applications and how an application can configure and use the features that make up these services. It also discusses the service provided by the Low Extra Delay Background Transport (LEDBAT) congestion control mechanism. The description results in a set of transport abstractions that can be exported in a TAPS API. For UDP and UDP-Lite, the first step of the protocol analysis -- a discussion of relevant RFC text -- is documented in [FJ16]. XX RFC ED - PLEASE REPLACE [FJ16] WITH THE CORRECT RFC NUMBER XXX The file can be obtained via https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-taps-transports-usage/ IESG discussion can be tracked via https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-taps-transports-usage/ballot/ No IPR declarations have been submitted directly on this I-D. |
2017-08-31
|
08 | Cindy Morgan | IESG state changed to In Last Call from Last Call Requested |
2017-08-31
|
08 | Spencer Dawkins | Placed on agenda for telechat - 2017-09-14 |
2017-08-31
|
08 | Spencer Dawkins | Last call was requested |
2017-08-31
|
08 | Spencer Dawkins | Ballot approval text was generated |
2017-08-31
|
08 | Spencer Dawkins | Ballot writeup was generated |
2017-08-31
|
08 | Spencer Dawkins | IESG state changed to Last Call Requested from AD Evaluation::AD Followup |
2017-08-31
|
08 | Spencer Dawkins | Last call announcement was generated |
2017-08-26
|
08 | Michael Welzl | New version available: draft-ietf-taps-transports-usage-08.txt |
2017-08-26
|
08 | (System) | New version approved |
2017-08-26
|
08 | (System) | Request for posting confirmation emailed to previous authors: Michael Welzl , Michael Tuexen , Naeem Khademi |
2017-08-26
|
08 | Michael Welzl | Uploaded new revision |
2017-08-25
|
07 | (System) | Sub state has been changed to AD Followup from Revised ID Needed |
2017-08-25
|
07 | Michael Welzl | New version available: draft-ietf-taps-transports-usage-07.txt |
2017-08-25
|
07 | (System) | New version approved |
2017-08-25
|
07 | (System) | Request for posting confirmation emailed to previous authors: Michael Welzl , Michael Tuexen , Naeem Khademi |
2017-08-25
|
07 | Michael Welzl | Uploaded new revision |
2017-08-24
|
06 | Spencer Dawkins | IESG state changed to AD Evaluation::Revised I-D Needed from AD Evaluation |
2017-08-01
|
06 | Spencer Dawkins | IESG state changed to AD Evaluation from Publication Requested |
2017-07-31
|
06 | Zaheduzzaman Sarker | 1. Summary The document shepherd is Zaheduzzaman Sarker. The responsible Area Director is Spencer Dawkins. This document describes well established function calls as "primitives" that … 1. Summary The document shepherd is Zaheduzzaman Sarker. The responsible Area Director is Spencer Dawkins. This document describes well established function calls as "primitives" that any program can use to get automated services from TCP, MP-TCP, SCTP, LEDBAT, UDP and UDP-lite protocol. This description gives very good information about the services provided by the protocols as in the RFC series. Further it describes the 3 pass process had been followed to derive the transport features. Over all this document serves as a useful source of information for using transport services. 2. Review and Consensus As this describe primitives based on what already available in RFC series for those protocol it was straightforward to get consensus on the primitives. All versions of this document got a fair amount of discussions in the mailing list hence were well reviewed and got positive feedbacks on working group last call. There were discussions on what protocols should the document cover, especially for inclusion of secure protocols such as TLS and DTLS. This was well communicated with respective workings. As at that time TAPS WG was lacking of security protocol expertise the consensus was to keep those out of the scope of the document. Furthermore, for the shake of manageability the UDP and UDP-lite partitives were written in a separate document. 3. Intellectual Property Each author has confirmed conformance with BCP 78/79. There are no IPR disclosures on the document. 4. Other Points There is no normative downref and no IANA considerations. |
2017-07-31
|
06 | Zaheduzzaman Sarker | Responsible AD changed to Spencer Dawkins |
2017-07-31
|
06 | Zaheduzzaman Sarker | IETF WG state changed to Submitted to IESG for Publication from WG Consensus: Waiting for Write-Up |
2017-07-31
|
06 | Zaheduzzaman Sarker | IESG state changed to Publication Requested |
2017-07-31
|
06 | Zaheduzzaman Sarker | IESG process started in state Publication Requested |
2017-07-31
|
06 | Zaheduzzaman Sarker | Notification list changed to Zaheduzzaman Sarker <Zaheduzzaman.Sarker@ericsson.com> |
2017-07-31
|
06 | Zaheduzzaman Sarker | Document shepherd changed to Zaheduzzaman Sarker |
2017-07-31
|
06 | Zaheduzzaman Sarker | Changed document writeup |
2017-07-07
|
06 | Aaron Falk | IETF WG state changed to WG Consensus: Waiting for Write-Up from In WG Last Call |
2017-06-23
|
06 | Michael Welzl | New version available: draft-ietf-taps-transports-usage-06.txt |
2017-06-23
|
06 | (System) | New version approved |
2017-06-23
|
06 | (System) | Request for posting confirmation emailed to previous authors: Michael Welzl , Michael Tuexen , Naeem Khademi |
2017-06-23
|
06 | Michael Welzl | Uploaded new revision |
2017-06-05
|
05 | Aaron Falk | Intended Status changed to Informational from None |
2017-06-05
|
05 | Aaron Falk | IETF WG state changed to In WG Last Call from WG Document |
2017-05-24
|
05 | Michael Welzl | New version available: draft-ietf-taps-transports-usage-05.txt |
2017-05-24
|
05 | (System) | New version approved |
2017-05-24
|
05 | (System) | Request for posting confirmation emailed to previous authors: =?utf-8?q?Michael_T=C3=BCxen?= , Michael Welzl , taps-chairs@ietf.org, Naeem Khademi |
2017-05-24
|
05 | Michael Welzl | Uploaded new revision |
2017-04-05
|
04 | Michael Welzl | New version available: draft-ietf-taps-transports-usage-04.txt |
2017-04-05
|
04 | (System) | New version approved |
2017-04-05
|
04 | (System) | Request for posting confirmation emailed to previous authors: =?utf-8?q?Michael_T=C3=BCxen?= , Michael Welzl , taps-chairs@ietf.org, Naeem Khademi |
2017-04-05
|
04 | Michael Welzl | Uploaded new revision |
2017-03-08
|
03 | Michael Welzl | New version available: draft-ietf-taps-transports-usage-03.txt |
2017-03-08
|
03 | (System) | New version approved |
2017-03-08
|
03 | (System) | Request for posting confirmation emailed to previous authors: =?utf-8?q?Michael_T=C3=BCxen?= , Michael Welzl , taps-chairs@ietf.org, Naeem Khademi |
2017-03-08
|
03 | Michael Welzl | Uploaded new revision |
2017-03-07
|
02 | Aaron Falk | Added to session: IETF-98: taps Tue-1640 |
2016-11-14
|
02 | Aaron Falk | Added to session: IETF-97: taps Wed-0930 |
2016-10-31
|
02 | Michael Welzl | New version available: draft-ietf-taps-transports-usage-02.txt |
2016-10-31
|
02 | (System) | New version approved |
2016-10-31
|
01 | (System) | Request for posting confirmation emailed to previous authors: "Naeem Khademi" , "Michael Tuexen" , "Michael Welzl" |
2016-10-31
|
01 | Michael Welzl | Uploaded new revision |
2016-07-08
|
01 | Naeem Khademi | New version available: draft-ietf-taps-transports-usage-01.txt |
2016-01-08
|
00 | Michael Welzl | New version available: draft-ietf-taps-transports-usage-00.txt |