Skip to main content

Problem Statement and Requirements for Increased Accuracy in Explicit Congestion Notification (ECN) Feedback
draft-ietf-tcpm-accecn-reqs-08

Revision differences

Document history

Date Rev. By Action
2015-10-14
08 (System) Notify list changed from tcpm-chairs@ietf.org, draft-ietf-tcpm-accecn-reqs@ietf.org to (None)
2015-08-26
08 (System) RFC published
2015-08-21
08 (System) RFC Editor state changed to AUTH48-DONE from AUTH48
2015-05-20
08 (System) RFC Editor state changed to AUTH48 from RFC-EDITOR
2015-05-20
08 (System) RFC Editor state changed to RFC-EDITOR from EDIT
2015-03-30
08 (System) IANA Action state changed to No IC
2015-03-26
08 Cindy Morgan IESG state changed to RFC Ed Queue from Approved-announcement sent
2015-03-26
08 (System) RFC Editor state changed to EDIT
2015-03-26
08 (System) Announcement was received by RFC Editor
2015-03-26
08 Cindy Morgan IESG state changed to Approved-announcement sent from Approved-announcement to be sent
2015-03-26
08 Cindy Morgan IESG has approved the document
2015-03-26
08 Cindy Morgan Closed "Approve" ballot
2015-03-26
08 Cindy Morgan Ballot writeup was changed
2015-03-26
08 Martin Stiemerling all set.
2015-03-26
08 Martin Stiemerling IESG state changed to Approved-announcement to be sent from Approved-announcement to be sent::Point Raised - writeup needed
2015-03-26
08 Martin Stiemerling Ballot writeup was changed
2015-03-26
08 Martin Stiemerling Ballot approval text was generated
2015-03-09
08 Mirja Kühlewind IANA Review state changed to Version Changed - Review Needed from IANA OK - No Actions Needed
2015-03-09
08 Mirja Kühlewind New version available: draft-ietf-tcpm-accecn-reqs-08.txt
2015-03-02
07 Tero Kivinen Closed request for Last Call review by SECDIR with state 'No Response'
2015-02-19
07 Cindy Morgan IESG state changed to Approved-announcement to be sent::Point Raised - writeup needed from IESG Evaluation
2015-02-19
07 Cindy Morgan Changed consensus to Yes from Unknown
2015-02-19
07 Joel Jaeggli [Ballot Position Update] New position, No Objection, has been recorded for Joel Jaeggli
2015-02-19
07 Adrian Farrel [Ballot Position Update] New position, No Objection, has been recorded for Adrian Farrel
2015-02-19
07 Ted Lemon [Ballot Position Update] New position, Yes, has been recorded for Ted Lemon
2015-02-19
07 Alia Atlas [Ballot Position Update] New position, No Objection, has been recorded for Alia Atlas
2015-02-19
07 Kathleen Moriarty
[Ballot comment]
In the ack section, there is a statement that says,
  "The views expressed here are solely those of the
  authors."

I …
[Ballot comment]
In the ack section, there is a statement that says,
  "The views expressed here are solely those of the
  authors."

I know this is stated as to ensure it is not necessarily the views of the sponsoring project.  If this will be listed as having consensus (not done yet), should this statement be reworded to avoid conflict between the consensus statement?

This is just a non-blocking comment for the AD to consider.
2015-02-19
07 Kathleen Moriarty [Ballot Position Update] New position, No Objection, has been recorded for Kathleen Moriarty
2015-02-19
07 Jari Arkko [Ballot Position Update] New position, No Objection, has been recorded for Jari Arkko
2015-02-18
07 Barry Leiba [Ballot Position Update] New position, No Objection, has been recorded for Barry Leiba
2015-02-18
07 Alissa Cooper [Ballot Position Update] New position, No Objection, has been recorded for Alissa Cooper
2015-02-17
07 Spencer Dawkins
[Ballot comment]
This text:

5.2.  Using Other Header Bits

  Any proposal to use such bits would need to check the likelihood that
  some …
[Ballot comment]
This text:

5.2.  Using Other Header Bits

  Any proposal to use such bits would need to check the likelihood that
  some middleboxes might discard or 'normalize' the currently unused
  flag bits or a non-zero Urgent Pointer when the Urgent Flag is
  cleared.  Assignment of any of these bits would then require an IETF
  standards action.
 
doesn't read quite right to me. Just reversing the logic, I'm getting "no IETF standards action is required unless middleboxes are twiddling the bits you're using for your proposal". Is that what you mean? Or is this just while experimenting?
2015-02-17
07 Spencer Dawkins [Ballot Position Update] New position, Yes, has been recorded for Spencer Dawkins
2015-02-13
07 Brian Carpenter Request for Telechat review by GENART Completed: Almost Ready. Reviewer: Brian Carpenter.
2015-02-12
07 Jean Mahoney Request for Telechat review by GENART is assigned to Brian Carpenter
2015-02-12
07 Jean Mahoney Request for Telechat review by GENART is assigned to Brian Carpenter
2015-02-11
07 Martin Stiemerling IESG state changed to IESG Evaluation from Waiting for AD Go-Ahead
2015-02-11
07 Martin Stiemerling Placed on agenda for telechat - 2015-02-19
2015-02-11
07 Martin Stiemerling Ballot has been issued
2015-02-11
07 Martin Stiemerling [Ballot Position Update] New position, Yes, has been recorded for Martin Stiemerling
2015-02-11
07 Martin Stiemerling Created "Approve" ballot
2015-02-11
07 Martin Stiemerling Ballot writeup was changed
2015-02-10
07 Martin Stiemerling IESG state changed to Waiting for AD Go-Ahead from Waiting for Writeup
2014-12-04
07 Gunter Van de Velde Request for Last Call review by OPSDIR Completed: Has Issues. Reviewer: Linda Dunbar.
2014-12-04
07 (System) IESG state changed to Waiting for Writeup from In Last Call
2014-11-27
07 Tero Kivinen Request for Last Call review by SECDIR is assigned to Paul Wouters
2014-11-27
07 Tero Kivinen Request for Last Call review by SECDIR is assigned to Paul Wouters
2014-11-25
07 Brian Carpenter Request for Last Call review by GENART Completed: Almost Ready. Reviewer: Brian Carpenter.
2014-11-24
07 (System) IANA Review state changed to IANA OK - No Actions Needed from IANA - Review Needed
2014-11-24
07 Amanda Baber
IESG/Authors/WG Chairs:

IANA has reviewed draft-ietf-tcpm-accecn-reqs-07, which is currently in Last Call, and has the following comments:

We understand that this document doesn't require …
IESG/Authors/WG Chairs:

IANA has reviewed draft-ietf-tcpm-accecn-reqs-07, which is currently in Last Call, and has the following comments:

We understand that this document doesn't require any IANA actions.

While it is helpful for the IANA Considerations section of the document to remain in place upon publication, if the authors prefer to remove it, IANA doesn't object.

If this assessment is not accurate, please respond as soon as possible.
2014-11-21
07 Gunter Van de Velde Request for Last Call review by OPSDIR is assigned to Linda Dunbar
2014-11-21
07 Gunter Van de Velde Request for Last Call review by OPSDIR is assigned to Linda Dunbar
2014-11-20
07 Jean Mahoney Request for Last Call review by GENART is assigned to Brian Carpenter
2014-11-20
07 Jean Mahoney Request for Last Call review by GENART is assigned to Brian Carpenter
2014-11-20
07 Cindy Morgan IANA Review state changed to IANA - Review Needed
2014-11-20
07 Cindy Morgan
The following Last Call announcement was sent out:

From: The IESG
To: IETF-Announce
CC:
Reply-To: ietf@ietf.org
Sender:
Subject: Last Call:  (Problem Statement and Requirements for …
The following Last Call announcement was sent out:

From: The IESG
To: IETF-Announce
CC:
Reply-To: ietf@ietf.org
Sender:
Subject: Last Call:  (Problem Statement and Requirements for a More Accurate ECN Feedback) to Informational RFC


The IESG has received a request from the TCP Maintenance and Minor
Extensions WG (tcpm) to consider the following document:
- 'Problem Statement and Requirements for a More Accurate ECN Feedback'
  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 2014-12-04. 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


  Explicit Congestion Notification (ECN) is a mechanism where network
  nodes can mark IP packets instead of dropping them to indicate
  congestion to the end-points.  An ECN-capable receiver will feed this
  information back to the sender.  ECN is specified for TCP in such a
  way that it can only feed back one congestion signal per Round-Trip
  Time (RTT).  In contrast, ECN for other transport protocols, such as
  RTP/UDP and SCTP, is specified with more accurate ECN feedback.
  Recent new TCP mechanisms (like ConEx or DCTCP) need more accurate
  ECN feedback in the case where more than one marking is received in
  one RTT.  This document specifies requirements for an update to the
  TCP protocol to provide more accurate ECN feedback.




The file can be obtained via
http://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-tcpm-accecn-reqs/

IESG discussion can be tracked via
http://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-tcpm-accecn-reqs/ballot/


No IPR declarations have been submitted directly on this I-D.


2014-11-20
07 Cindy Morgan IESG state changed to In Last Call from Last Call Requested
2014-11-20
07 Martin Stiemerling Last call was requested
2014-11-20
07 Martin Stiemerling Ballot approval text was generated
2014-11-20
07 Martin Stiemerling Ballot writeup was generated
2014-11-20
07 Martin Stiemerling IESG state changed to Last Call Requested from AD Evaluation
2014-11-20
07 Martin Stiemerling Last call announcement was generated
2014-09-09
07 Martin Stiemerling IESG state changed to AD Evaluation from Publication Requested
2014-08-21
07 Pasi Sarolahti
(This writeup follows the alternate format as provided at http://trac.tools.ietf.org/group/iesg/trac/wiki/DraftShepherdWriteupWgAlternate)


1. Summary

Document shepherd is Pasi Sarolahti. Responsible AD is Martin Stiemerling.

Traditionally the …
(This writeup follows the alternate format as provided at http://trac.tools.ietf.org/group/iesg/trac/wiki/DraftShepherdWriteupWgAlternate)


1. Summary

Document shepherd is Pasi Sarolahti. Responsible AD is Martin Stiemerling.

Traditionally the explicit congestion notification can deliver only one congestion signal in a round-trip time with TCP. This Informational document motivates the case for delivering more accurate congestion information for TCP. It discusses high-level requirements for methods for delivering more accurate congestion information, but does not specify such mechanism. Therefore Informational is considered appropriate document type.

2. Review and Consensus

The document was reviewed by a few WG participants in its different phases, also during the WGLC. There has been no controversy over it. TCPM chairs believe the document is stable and has gone through a sufficient review, and is ready for publication.

3. Intellectual Property

There are no IPR disclosures on this document, and the authors have confirmed that they are not aware of undisclosed IPR related to this document.

The draft discusses the possible solution space and related earlier proposals, some of which have disclosed IPRs (draft-bensley-tcpm-dctcp-01, draft-kuehlewind-tcpm-accurate-ecn-03). These disclosures can be found on the IPR page based on the respective draft names.

4. Other points

None. There were no issues based on the checklist provided with the alternative write-up instructions.
2014-08-21
07 Pasi Sarolahti IETF WG state changed to Submitted to IESG for Publication from In WG Last Call
2014-08-21
07 Pasi Sarolahti IESG state changed to Publication Requested from AD is watching
2014-08-21
07 Pasi Sarolahti
(This writeup follows the alternate format as provided at http://trac.tools.ietf.org/group/iesg/trac/wiki/DraftShepherdWriteupWgAlternate)


1. Summary

Document shepherd is Pasi Sarolahti. Responsible AD is Martin Stiemerling.

Traditionally the …
(This writeup follows the alternate format as provided at http://trac.tools.ietf.org/group/iesg/trac/wiki/DraftShepherdWriteupWgAlternate)


1. Summary

Document shepherd is Pasi Sarolahti. Responsible AD is Martin Stiemerling.

Traditionally the explicit congestion notification can deliver only one congestion signal in a round-trip time with TCP. This Informational document motivates the case for delivering more accurate congestion information for TCP. It discusses high-level requirements for methods for delivering more accurate congestion information, but does not specify such mechanism. Therefore Informational is considered appropriate document type.

2. Review and Consensus

The document was reviewed by a few WG participants in its different phases, also during the WGLC. There has been no controversy over it. TCPM chairs believe the document is stable and has gone through a sufficient review, and is ready for publication.

3. Intellectual Property

There are no IPR disclosures on this document, and the authors have confirmed that they are not aware of undisclosed IPR related to this document.

The draft discusses the possible solution space and related earlier proposals, some of which have disclosed IPRs (draft-bensley-tcpm-dctcp-01, draft-kuehlewind-tcpm-accurate-ecn-03). These disclosures can be found on the IPR page based on the respective draft names.

4. Other points

None. There were no issues based on the checklist provided with the alternative write-up instructions.
2014-08-21
07 Pasi Sarolahti Document shepherd changed to Pasi Sarolahti
2014-07-25
07 Bob Briscoe New version available: draft-ietf-tcpm-accecn-reqs-07.txt
2014-07-05
06 Pasi Sarolahti IETF WG state changed to In WG Last Call from WG Document
2014-07-03
06 Mirja Kühlewind New version available: draft-ietf-tcpm-accecn-reqs-06.txt
2014-02-14
05 Mirja Kühlewind New version available: draft-ietf-tcpm-accecn-reqs-05.txt
2013-10-21
04 Mirja Kühlewind New version available: draft-ietf-tcpm-accecn-reqs-04.txt
2013-08-23
03 Martin Stiemerling Intended Status changed to Informational
2013-08-23
03 Martin Stiemerling IESG process started in state AD is watching
2013-08-23
03 (System) Earlier history may be found in the Comment Log for /doc/draft-kuehlewind-tcpm-accecn-reqs/
2013-07-15
03 Mirja Kühlewind New version available: draft-ietf-tcpm-accecn-reqs-03.txt
2013-07-11
02 Mirja Kühlewind New version available: draft-ietf-tcpm-accecn-reqs-02.txt
2013-07-11
01 Mirja Kühlewind New version available: draft-ietf-tcpm-accecn-reqs-01.txt
2013-02-11
00 Mirja Kühlewind New version available: draft-ietf-tcpm-accecn-reqs-00.txt