Hi,

On 2020-10-6, at 10:21, Lars Eggert <[email protected]> wrote:
> we decided to take up Ian's suggestion to schedule a virtual interim meeting 
> to discuss the multipath topic. To find a suitable time before the next IETF 
> meeting, please fill out the Doodle at
> 
> https://doodle.com/poll/iqmap34cszi4qub4
> 
> by the end of Thursday, Oct 8. We'll pick a slot on Friday, Oct 9 and 
> announce it.

reminder to please state your preferences by the end of today.

> On each day, there are two four-hour slots that I think are workable, given 
> our participant distribution.

We received feedback that four hours are maybe more than needed, and a long 
slot like this makes scheduling somewhat more difficult.

Speaking as one chair - but without having discussed this to great lengths with 
my co-chairs - the goal for the interim is to try and come to consensus on what 
to do about the multipath work item our current charter includes.

A 2h slot is likely OK for this. We'll identify a 4h slots based on the Doodle 
poll and will try to select a 2h window within that slot that further maximizes 
attendance.

Multipath was included in our initial charter, because it was being 
investigated for Google QUIC, which was the main input to our work. As can be 
observed by discussions over the past year or so - and especially during the 
last few weeks - whether the QUIC WG or the IETF should work on multipath 
support for QUIC, and on what time line - is a contentious topic. Many options 
have been expressed in this discussion so far, ranging from "remove the charter 
item and BOF the topic" to "adopt draft-deconinck and start the work now" and 
other options in between.

The purpose of the interim is to provide a higher-bandwidth venue for this 
discussion, in the hopes that some ways forward emerge that might reach 
consensus.

Personally, I believe that is essential that any complex engineering on QUIC, 
such as the addition of multipath, is motivated by the needs of large-scale 
deployments and driven by engineers that are in a position to feed back 
experiences and data from such deployments into the design process in a timely 
manner. This is how the WG managed to develop the existing QUIC specifications 
in a relatively short amount of time (given the changes we made to the initial 
QUIC design). It would be unfortunate if we gave up this proven model of design 
and engineering.

Thanks,
Lars

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Message signed with OpenPGP

Reply via email to