Hi Carsten,

Thanks a lot for your comments.

While we work to address those, it would be really helpful if folks that
have faced 'bad constrained TCP implementations', and/or have struggled
with middlebox traversal can share their experience.

Cheers,

Carles


> Carles,
>
> thanks for submitting this.
>
> I think that this draft is truly best handled in LWIG.
>
> We don't *have* to profile TCP for CoAP-over-TCP; people are free to use
> whatever parts of TCP they think are useful.  (And, of course, there are
> applications for CoAP-over-TCP that are in the backend.)
>
> On the other hand, it is useful to
> -- manage expectations:
>    what can I expect that the *other* side will offer in TCP functionality
> -- give advice to implementers:
>    what is useful to implement, what not
> -- collect implementation experience that is relevant for these two
>
> (One interesting effect I'm seeing is that people know how good TCP can
> be, which shapes their expectations, but then they are hurt by using
> really bad constrained TCP implementations...  We certainly should be
> paying attention to this on the CoRE WG side.)
>
> My biggest comment is probably that for device-to-cloud, the level of
> TCP functions implemented will be asymmetric (full TCP on cloud side,
> possibly more limited on the device side) -- what is the effect of this
> asymmetry?
>
> Maybe there also needs to be more discussion on the role of the
> middlebox (after all, we are doing CoAP-over-TCP to devices for the sole
> reason to climb over middleboxes).
>
> Grüße, Carsten
>
>
> Scharf, Michael (Nokia - DE) wrote:
>> Heads-up
>>
>> Michael
>>
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Lwip [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Carles Gomez
>> Montenegro
>> Sent: Friday, June 10, 2016 11:36 AM
>> To: [email protected]
>> Cc: [email protected]
>> Subject: [Lwip] [Fwd: New Version Notification for
>> draft-gomez-core-tcp-constrained-node-networks-00.txt]
>>
>> Dear LWIG WG,
>>
>> /** Apologies for possibly multiple similar e-mails... **/
>>
>> We have just submitted the draft entitled 'TCP over Constrained-Node
>> Networks', which we believe may be of interest to the members of this
>> group.
>>
>> We would like to kindly ask for feedback, specially on the basis of
>> implementation experience.
>>
>> Thank you very much!
>>
>> Kind regards,
>>
>> The authors
>>
>>
>> ---------------------------- Original Message
>> ----------------------------
>> Subject: New Version Notification for
>> draft-gomez-core-tcp-constrained-node-networks-00.txt
>> From:    [email protected]
>> Date:    Fri, June 10, 2016 10:38 am
>> To:      "Jon Crowcroft" <[email protected]>
>>          "Carles Gomez" <[email protected]>
>> --------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>
>>
>> A new version of I-D,
>> draft-gomez-core-tcp-constrained-node-networks-00.txt
>> has been successfully submitted by Carles Gomez and posted to the IETF
>> repository.
>>
>> Name:                draft-gomez-core-tcp-constrained-node-networks
>> Revision:    00
>> Title:               TCP over Constrained-Node Networks
>> Document date:       2016-06-10
>> Group:               Individual Submission
>> Pages:               9
>> URL:
>> https://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-gomez-core-tcp-constrained-node-networks-00.txt
>> Status:
>> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-gomez-core-tcp-constrained-node-networks/
>> Htmlized:
>> https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-gomez-core-tcp-constrained-node-networks-00
>>
>>
>> Abstract:
>>    This document provides a profile for the Transmission Control
>>    Protocol (TCP) over Constrained-Node Networks (CNNs).  The
>>    overarching goal is to offer simple measures to allow for lightweight
>>    TCP implementation and suitable operation in such environments.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> Please note that it may take a couple of minutes from the time of
>> submission until the htmlized version and diff are available at
>> tools.ietf.org.
>>
>> The IETF Secretariat
>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Lwip mailing list
>> [email protected]
>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/lwip
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> tcpm mailing list
>> [email protected]
>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tcpm
>>
>


_______________________________________________
Lwip mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/lwip

Reply via email to