-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA512 I raised the need for this transparency in this writeup: http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-tschofenig-hourglass-00
The document also points to some projects / paper I am aware of that are relevant. There may be more. Ciao Hannes On Jul 30, 2013, at 2:17 PM, Roland Bless wrote: > Hi, > > my impression from several presentations seen this week at the IETF > as well as at the ISOC Panel on "Improving Internet Experience" > is that we probably need to do something on reducing the number > of _broken_ middleboxes (or their implementations respectively) > - I'm not focusing on NAT boxes here. > > We all know that it's actually hard to engineer new innovative > protocols around those broken boxes in the path. I think it's > clear that we will not get rid of them, but if I hear about > boxes that try to do "clever optimization" or "security" by > rewriting TCP sequence numbers (w/o considering them in SACK), > bundling segments and so on, I'm wondering who actually engineered > those boxes; aren't the vendors/engineers participating in the IETF? > Who buys and deploys such boxes, esp. if you consider that todays short- > sighted optimization may prevent usage of a newer transport protocol > that actually may provide a much larger performance improvement than > this middlebox? > > It's really sad that we still have many problems due to such > broken implementations that break the Internet transparency > and hinder innovations like SCTP, ECN, various TCP enhancements, > and many others. > What could be IETF efforts to get a better situation for the deployment > of future innovations or do we simply accept that (a few) broken > middleboxes dictate the future level of innovation in the Internet? > > Regards, > Roland > > Some prior related work: > https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc2775 Internet Transparency > https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc3724 The Rise of the Middle and the > Future of End-to-End: Reflections on the Evolution of the Internet > Architecture > https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc4924 Reflections on Internet Transparency -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG/MacGPG2 v2.0.19 (Darwin) Comment: GPGTools - http://gpgtools.org iQEcBAEBCgAGBQJR97L3AAoJEGhJURNOOiAt0hkH/ityOYpfqP752++/DL/K0DVZ 6q4gGpmzZwGcAnacUaAUy6Ycdajj7onJQydwGyvG4/nxbjM5g/2PeRpJdCjfSPhU oUQt+2Xe8GXTRS6/IAwVh2M2DCz1RX3My2prM+4t9cVXWO0T2rpx60d6I6Wz04Ei aYVAPx1n8IcggxbVy/KiVR4mUmzIzKNA1O2peNhKxntpWyKpkddfHv4GwzIK3Gmj /pOmAPSyXbdQ+Oi8Nq233GyzXq/NeL513Z66qZvW3e6EYFa+6Wg3eJk7XA0zSk0x 6QZPX9KO72UrE66hPZw7t5lgWNtyKBqo0bTn9SEVqH39M+hwkATVecsydJ1gePE= =EhV6 -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
