Subject: [tcpm] rev 10 of rto-consider

From: "Mark Allman" <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 05 Feb 2020 14:55:54 -0500

Folks-

I submitted version -10 of rto-consider yesterday.  The updates in
this version stem from the comments offered by Gorry & Jana at and
after the last IETF meeting (thanks!).  In particular, the
substantive changes relative to pre-IETF106 are:

  - Gorry's list of fairly minor issues from the last meeting have
    been addressed.

  - Section 2 on the document's context and its relationship with
    other IETF documents has been hacked on pretty good, based on
    chatting with Gorry.  I don't want to speak for Gorry, but he
    has seen these words and based on his feedback I believe his
    issue has been addressed.

  - Jana has long nudged me to subtly change the document's thrust
    from "retransmission" to "loss detection".  I.e., the timer's
    fundamental job is not to retransmit, but to determine when a
    segment has been lost.  And, the response to a detected loss may
    not always be to retransmit the segment (e.g., it could be to
    make congestion control decisions).  I have made this change.
    Two notes:

    (1) This doesn't at all change any of the technical requirements
        given in the document.  For instance, the document still
        says time-based loss detection SHOULD be based on the
        feedback time and the variance in the feedback time, just as
        it previously said retransmissions SHOULD be based on the FT
        and the variance in the FT.

    (2) The change the specific words in countless places in the
        document where the term "retransmission" was used and now
        the document frames the discussion in terms of "loss
        detection".  So, the diffs are therefore ugly.  (The good
        news is that you can eschew the diffs and just read the
        thing because it's still a short document.)

It'd be great if folks could take a look at the document and send
along any comments.  I know the chairs previously said they'd like
to get a WGLC going soon (which is why they sought reviews from Jana
& Gorry).  I'd like that, too.

Thanks!

allman

--
https://www.icir.org/mallman/
@mallman_icsi

---

From: Gorry Fairhurst <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 10 Feb 2020 11:32:10 +0000

On 05/02/2020 19:55, Mark Allman wrote:
> _______________________________________________
> tcpm mailing list
> [email-masked]
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tcpm

That seems a good summary Mark, thanks for taking on board my comments!

Gorry