On Sun, Sep 27, 2020 at 11:08 AM Spencer Dawkins at IETF < [email protected]> wrote:
> Dear QUIC working group, > > On Fri, Sep 25, 2020 at 5:00 AM Lars Eggert <[email protected]> wrote: > >> In parallel to progressing the "base drafts" towards RFC publications, >> the WG should now also begin to pick up the pace on our other adopted work >> items (ops drafts, extensions, etc.) >> >> One important other discussion item is what to do about the multipath >> extension milestone, which some have suggested should be dropped, while >> others still show interest to pursue it. >> > > So, I'd like to understand the suggestion to drop this milestone, before I > start trying to discuss that suggestion :-). > > In conversations with individual folk, I've heard these concerns about > QUIC multipath: > > - Whether it will be possible to evaluate multipath performance at scale, > both for evaluating proposals and testing implementations. > I saw evaluations of individual implementations, I don't know if they have an mpquic test suite but I think, there is some for quic interoperability testing. These could be scaled easily (!), I think. > > - The complexity involved in making decisions dynamically about which path > to send a given packet on (which could be a research topic, given certain > constraints and goals). > > This should be answered by implementers. 3GPP is eager to standardize mpquic for 5G ATSSS which is basically traffic steering, i.e. telling where/which path to steer the packet based on operators business policies, etc. Regards, Behcet > If I've misunderstood or misquoted, my apologies, of course. Please > correct me. > > What other concerns do people have? I'd like to get all the objections out > at the beginning of the discussion. > > Thanks! > > Spencer >
