Managing multiple paths for a QUIC connection
draft-ietf-quic-multipath-21

Approval announcement
Draft of message to be sent after approval:

Announcement

From: The IESG <iesg-secretary@ietf.org>
To: IETF-Announce <ietf-announce@ietf.org>
Cc: The IESG <iesg@ietf.org>, draft-ietf-quic-multipath@ietf.org, gorry@erg.abdn.ac.uk, lucas@lucaspardue.com, quic-chairs@ietf.org, quic@ietf.org, rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org
Subject: Protocol Action: 'Managing multiple paths for a QUIC connection' to Proposed Standard (draft-ietf-quic-multipath-21.txt)

The IESG has approved the following document:
- 'Managing multiple paths for a QUIC connection'
  (draft-ietf-quic-multipath-21.txt) as Proposed Standard

This document is the product of the QUIC Working Group.

The IESG contact persons are Gorry Fairhurst and Mike Bishop.

A URL of this Internet-Draft is:
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-quic-multipath/

Ballot Text

Technical Summary

   This document specifies a multipath extension for the QUIC protocol
   to enable the simultaneous usage of multiple paths for a single
   connection.  It proposes a standard way to create, delete, and manage
   paths using identifiers.  It does not specify address discovery or
   management, nor how applications using QUIC schedule traffic over
   multiple paths.

Working Group Summary

The document represents the consensus of a broad group of participants. The genesis of the document was the combination of several distinct technical proposals. Through the lengthy WG process, the design has converged towards the singular design now presented.

The document followed the Github workflow, used for all QUIC WG documents. Since the draft was adopted in 2022, almost 300 issues, and over 326 PRs were opened. Some of the largest discussion items revolved around single vs. multiple packet spaces and the relationship between connection IDs and path IDs. There was a lot of interest and energy in such topics, and although they took some time to overcome. The Shepherd is confident that the final consensus is not controversial or particularly rough.

Document Quality

The intended status is Proposed Standard. This is a proper type for the QUIC extension elements defined in the document. Care was taken throughout the document development and consensus process to ensure research topics were kept out of scope, meaning the an experimental status for the protocol itself is not required.  

The authors consist of several groups that have been independently implementing the draft iterations and carrying out regular interoperability tests (e.g., during hackathon events) and reporting results during WG meetings. The number of authors on the front page is 6. This was discussed extensively in the lead up to adoption with the author group, chairs and the responsible AD at the time. This number was justified by the document being an amalgamation of various design proposals that were unified via hard work, determination and compromise.

Personnel

   The Document Shepherd for this document is Lucas Pardue. The Responsible
   Area Director is Gorry Fairhurst.

RFC Editor Note