[Anima] MP-TCP (was: Re: Mirja Kuehlewind's Discuss on draft-ietf-anima-stable-connectivity-07: (with DISCUSS))

2018-02-01 Thread Toerless Eckert
On Thu, Feb 01, 2018 at 03:21:18PM -0500, Michael Richardson wrote: > I also don't know why it would be bad. > > My other question is, what happens in MPTCP is one path is significantly > faster (or less lossy) than the other path? Won't the window open up > significantly on that path and simply

Re: [Anima] Mirja Kuehlewind's Discuss on draft-ietf-anima-stable-connectivity-07: (with DISCUSS)

2018-02-01 Thread Michael Richardson
Spencer Dawkins at IETF wrote: > This is Mirja's Discuss thread, and MPTCP is her working group, and > she knows MPTCP better than I do, but I'm confused about one thing, as > I'm reading this discussion ... ... > If I'm understanding the

Re: [Anima] Mirja Kuehlewind's Discuss on draft-ietf-anima-stable-connectivity-07: (with DISCUSS)

2018-02-01 Thread Michael Richardson
Mirja Kuehlewind (IETF) wrote: > see below. >> Am 01.02.2018 um 16:31 schrieb Michael Richardson : >> >> >> Mirja Kuehlewind (IETF) wrote: >>> Why does your case 2 need an MPTCP connection instead of just

Re: [Anima] Mirja Kuehlewind's Discuss on draft-ietf-anima-stable-connectivity-07: (with DISCUSS)

2018-02-01 Thread Toerless Eckert
On Thu, Feb 01, 2018 at 05:14:58PM +0100, Mirja Kuehlewind (IETF) wrote: > > If all data-plane flows fail, then it might suspend traffic. > > That will not happen with MPTCP; it will fail back to use the ACP connection > (if there is a subflow for it). Right. This is one of the pieces that i

Re: [Anima] Mirja Kuehlewind's Discuss on draft-ietf-anima-stable-connectivity-07: (with DISCUSS)

2018-02-01 Thread Toerless Eckert
On Thu, Feb 01, 2018 at 12:46:14PM -0600, Spencer Dawkins at IETF wrote: > I do see the due diligence (she's a diligent AD), but I thought Mirja was > (also?) concerned that the draft was assuming that MPTCP could be made to > handle two paths in failover mode, when it actually doesn't work that

Re: [Anima] Mirja Kuehlewind's Discuss on draft-ietf-anima-stable-connectivity-07: (with DISCUSS)

2018-02-01 Thread Spencer Dawkins at IETF
Hi, Toerless, On Thu, Feb 1, 2018 at 12:34 PM, Toerless Eckert wrote: > On Thu, Feb 01, 2018 at 12:14:54PM -0600, Spencer Dawkins at IETF wrote: > > This is Mirja's Discuss thread, and MPTCP is her working group, and she > > knows MPTCP better than I do, but I'm confused about

Re: [Anima] Mirja Kuehlewind's Discuss on draft-ietf-anima-stable-connectivity-07: (with DISCUSS)

2018-02-01 Thread Toerless Eckert
On Thu, Feb 01, 2018 at 12:14:54PM -0600, Spencer Dawkins at IETF wrote: > This is Mirja's Discuss thread, and MPTCP is her working group, and she > knows MPTCP better than I do, but I'm confused about one thing, as I'm > reading this discussion ... > [...] > If I'm understanding the

Re: [Anima] Mirja Kuehlewind's Discuss on draft-ietf-anima-stable-connectivity-07: (with DISCUSS)

2018-02-01 Thread Toerless Eckert
Inline On Thu, Feb 01, 2018 at 02:42:29PM +0100, Mirja Kuehlewind (IETF) wrote: > HI Toerless, > > thanks so much for these edits. Unfortunately I have one more question. And > sorry again for the delay. > > Why does your case 2 need an MPTCP connection instead of just opening a > second

Re: [Anima] Mirja Kuehlewind's Discuss on draft-ietf-anima-stable-connectivity-07: (with DISCUSS)

2018-02-01 Thread Spencer Dawkins at IETF
This is Mirja's Discuss thread, and MPTCP is her working group, and she knows MPTCP better than I do, but I'm confused about one thing, as I'm reading this discussion ... On Thu, Feb 1, 2018 at 10:14 AM, Mirja Kuehlewind (IETF) < i...@kuehlewind.net> wrote: > Hi Michael, > > see below. > > > Am

Re: [Anima] Mirja Kuehlewind's Discuss on draft-ietf-anima-stable-connectivity-07: (with DISCUSS)

2018-02-01 Thread Mirja Kuehlewind (IETF)
HI Toerless, thanks so much for these edits. Unfortunately I have one more question. And sorry again for the delay. Why does your case 2 need an MPTCP connection instead of just opening a second separate TCP data plan connection (that of course fails when it fails..)? Mirja > Am 27.01.2018

Re: [Anima] Review comments//RE: WGLC on draft-ietf-anima-reference-model-05 - Respond by January 22nd, 2018

2018-02-01 Thread Ciavaglia, Laurent (Nokia - FR/Paris-Saclay)
Hello, We are currently 8 "co-authors" for this draft. My preferences, in priority order, are: 1) Michael as Editor, all other authors listed as authors, no contributors. 2) Michael as Editor, all other authors listed as contributors. Given how this document originated and has