On Fri, Aug 1, 2014 at 2:24 PM, marcelo bagnulo braun <[email protected]> wrote:
> El 01/08/14 21:59, Eric Rescorla escribió: > > >> >> >> On Fri, Aug 1, 2014 at 12:54 PM, marcelo bagnulo braun < >> [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: >> >> El 01/08/14 21:07, ianG escribió: >> >> On 1/08/2014 16:24 pm, marcelo bagnulo braun wrote: >> >> El 01/08/14 14:17, ianG escribió: Marcelo wrote: >> >> As we discussed in the meeting, we should try to >> make some design >> decisions for TCPINC. >> One of them is whether to protect or not the TCP >> header. >> >> is clearly, not to decide. The charter should leave >> the level of TCP >> header protection open. May the best proposal win. >> >> No. >> We are chartered to define one and only one standard for this. >> We would be doing a poor service to the community if we >> can decide and >> leave someone else the burden to figure out which is the >> approach to use. >> So the tcpinc wg should define one specification for this, >> not many. >> >> >> I agree. May the best proposal win: choose the one that best >> serves >> the overall needs of competing proposals. >> >> It's already clear from the proposals that there will be differing >> approaches and capabilities. Set a deadline, pick one. >> >> >> Right, this is the plan. >> The deadline we are aiming for to pick a proposal is november >> >> >> I do think it is helpful to discuss the requirements the proposals are >> aiming to hit, however. That way people can adjust their proposals >> to meet the relevant needs. >> > > Right, this is what we are doing at this stage. However, this process > needs to be fast enough (i.e. i dont think it is a good use of our energy > to spend 5 years discussing requirements and get people to tune their > proposals accordingly especially since after 5 years of tunning the > proposals are likely to be very similar and selection is impossible) > Agreed. > So, i think having a goal of selecting an approach in the next few months > that we can start working and improving is a reasonable goal, makes sense? > Yes. My understanding was that we had agreed to try do this in Honolulu. I think that's a good plan. -Ekr > > > >> -Ekr >> >> >> >
_______________________________________________ Tcpinc mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tcpinc
