From nobody Sat Nov 16 21:07:55 2019 Return-Path: X-Original-To: loops@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: loops@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7BD8C120018 for ; Sat, 16 Nov 2019 21:07:53 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -4.199 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.199 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 9mNQkeRB_6SR for ; Sat, 16 Nov 2019 21:07:51 -0800 (PST) Received: from gabriel-vm-2.zfn.uni-bremen.de (gabriel-vm-2.zfn.uni-bremen.de [134.102.50.17]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 7B1DB120043 for ; Sat, 16 Nov 2019 21:07:51 -0800 (PST) Received: from dhcp-9c88.meeting.ietf.org (dhcp-9c88.meeting.ietf.org [31.133.156.136]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by gabriel-vm-2.zfn.uni-bremen.de (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 47G0TK1yC2zydM; Sun, 17 Nov 2019 06:07:49 +0100 (CET) From: Carsten Bormann Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 X-Mao-Original-Outgoing-Id: 595660064.032186-d1a0dc644854c0dfa1825ec84a2f47a4 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 11.5 \(3445.9.1\)) Date: Sun, 17 Nov 2019 13:07:46 +0800 Message-Id: To: loops@ietf.org X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3445.9.1) Archived-At: Subject: [LOOPS] IETF106: LOOPS side meeting on Tuesday 08:30, Orchard Room X-BeenThere: loops@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: Local Optimizations on Path Segments List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 17 Nov 2019 05:07:53 -0000 After all the feedback we received at the non-WG-forming LOOPS BOF at = IETF 105, we have scheduled another side meeting for IETF 106: Tuesday 8:30-9:45, Room: Orchard=20 After some introduction, we want to make some progress on discussing = more detailed design issues, including: - encapsulations - retransmission operation (and the role of acknowledgements) - sketching an FEC mode (note that we are also on the agenda of NWCRG = (*)) and then maybe spend some time more clearly outlining the work to be = done in a potential LOOPS WG. This round should be interesting to transport protocol designers, tunnel = protocol designers, and FEC experts. The drafts you may want to look at for a quick update where we are: =E2=80=A2 Use cases = (https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-li-tsvwg-loops-problem-opportunities-03= ) =E2=80=A2 Solution sketch = (https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-welzl-loops-gen-info-02) =E2=80=A2 Encapsulation = (https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-bormann-loops-geneve-binding-00) Gr=C3=BC=C3=9Fe, Carsten (*) https://datatracker.ietf.org/meeting/106/materials/agenda-106-nwcrg From nobody Mon Nov 18 05:39:49 2019 Return-Path: X-Original-To: loops@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: loops@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 161CC1208AA for ; Mon, 18 Nov 2019 05:39:48 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.598 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.598 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_NONE=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 2Z1LRxRFgJcR for ; Mon, 18 Nov 2019 05:39:46 -0800 (PST) Received: from mailout-taastrup.gigahost.dk (mailout-taastrup.gigahost.dk [46.183.139.199]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 2B3181200BA for ; Mon, 18 Nov 2019 05:39:45 -0800 (PST) Received: from mailout.gigahost.dk (mailout.gigahost.dk [89.186.169.112]) by mailout-taastrup.gigahost.dk (Postfix) with ESMTP id 114A21893502 for ; Mon, 18 Nov 2019 13:39:37 +0000 (UTC) Received: from smtp.gigahost.dk (smtp.gigahost.dk [89.186.169.109]) by mailout.gigahost.dk (Postfix) with ESMTP id 26B367801A4 for ; Mon, 18 Nov 2019 13:39:41 +0000 (UTC) Received: by smtp.gigahost.dk (Postfix, from userid 1000) id DC79827303F2; Mon, 18 Nov 2019 13:39:36 +0000 (UTC) X-Screener-Id: f8b5956341cafa01bc0fc2c7b7d4a245e1dff3de Received: from [192.168.87.113] (unknown [85.218.152.21]) by smtp.gigahost.dk (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id A8F5127303EE for ; Mon, 18 Nov 2019 13:39:36 +0000 (UTC) To: loops@ietf.org References: From: "Morten V. Pedersen" Message-ID: Date: Mon, 18 Nov 2019 14:39:42 +0100 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:60.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/60.9.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Content-Language: en-US Archived-At: Subject: Re: [LOOPS] IETF106: LOOPS side meeting on Tuesday 08:30, Orchard Room X-BeenThere: loops@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: Local Optimizations on Path Segments List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 18 Nov 2019 13:39:48 -0000 Will remote participation be possible for this one? - M On 11/17/19 6:07 AM, Carsten Bormann wrote: > After all the feedback we received at the non-WG-forming LOOPS BOF at IETF 105, we have scheduled another side meeting for IETF 106: > > Tuesday 8:30-9:45, Room: Orchard > > After some introduction, we want to make some progress on discussing more detailed design issues, including: > > - encapsulations > - retransmission operation (and the role of acknowledgements) > - sketching an FEC mode (note that we are also on the agenda of NWCRG (*)) > > and then maybe spend some time more clearly outlining the work to be done in a potential LOOPS WG. > > This round should be interesting to transport protocol designers, tunnel protocol designers, and FEC experts. > > The drafts you may want to look at for a quick update where we are: > • Use cases (https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-li-tsvwg-loops-problem-opportunities-03) > • Solution sketch (https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-welzl-loops-gen-info-02) > • Encapsulation (https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-bormann-loops-geneve-binding-00) > > Grüße, Carsten > > (*) https://datatracker.ietf.org/meeting/106/materials/agenda-106-nwcrg > From nobody Mon Nov 18 05:52:54 2019 Return-Path: X-Original-To: loops@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: loops@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 08EC7120931 for ; Mon, 18 Nov 2019 05:52:52 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -4.2 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.2 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id EJ9MKMN-Dw2r for ; Mon, 18 Nov 2019 05:52:49 -0800 (PST) Received: from gabriel-vm-2.zfn.uni-bremen.de (gabriel-vm-2.zfn.uni-bremen.de [134.102.50.17]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 6CE00120915 for ; Mon, 18 Nov 2019 05:52:49 -0800 (PST) Received: from dhcp-9c88.meeting.ietf.org (dhcp-9c88.meeting.ietf.org [31.133.156.136]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by gabriel-vm-2.zfn.uni-bremen.de (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 47Gr4Z6fb0zyRD; Mon, 18 Nov 2019 14:52:46 +0100 (CET) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 11.5 \(3445.9.1\)) From: Carsten Bormann In-Reply-To: Date: Mon, 18 Nov 2019 21:52:44 +0800 Cc: loops@ietf.org X-Mao-Original-Outgoing-Id: 595777961.825265-af0d6dfab888d314ee985292c59bedce Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message-Id: <3D026CEF-AF7D-4CDE-8A5B-8CE5DCF749D1@tzi.org> References: To: "Morten V. Pedersen" X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3445.9.1) Archived-At: Subject: Re: [LOOPS] IETF106: LOOPS side meeting on Tuesday 08:30, Orchard Room X-BeenThere: loops@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: Local Optimizations on Path Segments List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 18 Nov 2019 13:52:52 -0000 On Nov 18, 2019, at 21:39, Morten V. Pedersen = wrote: >=20 > Will remote participation be possible for this one? There is no official remote participation support for side meetings at = the IETF. I will set up an iPad with Jitsi; please click the following link to = join the meeting: https://meet.jit.si/ietf106-loops (There is also phone access, but that won=E2=80=99t work too well given = the limited audio capabilities we=E2=80=99ll have: Dial-in: +1.512.402.2718 PIN: 4183817416# To see the dial in phone numbers for this meeting: https://meet.jit.si/static/dialInInfo.html?room=3Dietf106-loops ) What I can=E2=80=99t help with is the time zone (08:30 SGT =3D=3D 00:30 = UTC =3D=3D 01:30 CET)=E2=80=A6 Gr=C3=BC=C3=9Fe, Carsten >=20 > - M >=20 > On 11/17/19 6:07 AM, Carsten Bormann wrote: >> After all the feedback we received at the non-WG-forming LOOPS BOF at = IETF 105, we have scheduled another side meeting for IETF 106: >>=20 >> Tuesday 8:30-9:45, Room: Orchard >>=20 >> After some introduction, we want to make some progress on discussing = more detailed design issues, including: >>=20 >> - encapsulations >> - retransmission operation (and the role of acknowledgements) >> - sketching an FEC mode (note that we are also on the agenda of NWCRG = (*)) >>=20 >> and then maybe spend some time more clearly outlining the work to be = done in a potential LOOPS WG. >>=20 >> This round should be interesting to transport protocol designers, = tunnel protocol designers, and FEC experts. >>=20 >> The drafts you may want to look at for a quick update where we are: >> =E2=80=A2 Use cases = (https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-li-tsvwg-loops-problem-opportunities-03= ) >> =E2=80=A2 Solution sketch = (https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-welzl-loops-gen-info-02) >> =E2=80=A2 Encapsulation = (https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-bormann-loops-geneve-binding-00) >>=20 >> Gr=C3=BC=C3=9Fe, Carsten >>=20 >> (*) = https://datatracker.ietf.org/meeting/106/materials/agenda-106-nwcrg >>=20 >=20 > --=20 > LOOPS mailing list > LOOPS@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/loops From nobody Mon Nov 18 16:30:45 2019 Return-Path: X-Original-To: loops@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: loops@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5C6C9120125 for ; Mon, 18 Nov 2019 16:30:42 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -4.199 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.199 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 8k5vWeqaSERK for ; Mon, 18 Nov 2019 16:30:37 -0800 (PST) Received: from gabriel-vm-2.zfn.uni-bremen.de (gabriel-vm-2.zfn.uni-bremen.de [134.102.50.17]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 21ECF120025 for ; Mon, 18 Nov 2019 16:30:37 -0800 (PST) Received: from dhcp-9c88.meeting.ietf.org (dhcp-9c88.meeting.ietf.org [31.133.156.136]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by gabriel-vm-2.zfn.uni-bremen.de (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 47H6DV66XqzyhR; Tue, 19 Nov 2019 01:30:34 +0100 (CET) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 11.5 \(3445.9.1\)) From: Carsten Bormann In-Reply-To: <3D026CEF-AF7D-4CDE-8A5B-8CE5DCF749D1@tzi.org> Date: Tue, 19 Nov 2019 08:30:32 +0800 Cc: loops@ietf.org X-Mao-Original-Outgoing-Id: 595816230.89228-23993cb01bd018509da3911cdeb21aee Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message-Id: <163A8040-9B13-43AA-8917-F75D984B0EBF@tzi.org> References: <3D026CEF-AF7D-4CDE-8A5B-8CE5DCF749D1@tzi.org> To: "Morten V. Pedersen" X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3445.9.1) Archived-At: Subject: Re: [LOOPS] IETF106: LOOPS side meeting on Tuesday 08:30, Orchard Room X-BeenThere: loops@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: Local Optimizations on Path Segments List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 19 Nov 2019 00:30:42 -0000 On Nov 18, 2019, at 21:52, Carsten Bormann wrote: >=20 > There is no official remote participation support for side meetings at = the IETF. > I will set up an iPad with Jitsi; please click the following link to = join the meeting: > https://meet.jit.si/ietf106-loops A slide deck is at http://tzi.de/~cabo/LOOPS-106-side.pdf Gr=C3=BC=C3=9Fe, Carsten From nobody Mon Nov 18 20:41:07 2019 Return-Path: X-Original-To: loops@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: loops@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 02A1A12006F for ; Mon, 18 Nov 2019 20:41:03 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -4.199 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.199 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=unavailable autolearn_force=no Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id z9rQAXjFIVT7 for ; Mon, 18 Nov 2019 20:40:58 -0800 (PST) Received: from gabriel-vm-2.zfn.uni-bremen.de (gabriel-vm-2.zfn.uni-bremen.de [134.102.50.17]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 2CA6912011F for ; Mon, 18 Nov 2019 20:40:58 -0800 (PST) Received: from dhcp-9c88.meeting.ietf.org (dhcp-9c88.meeting.ietf.org [31.133.156.136]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by gabriel-vm-2.zfn.uni-bremen.de (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 47HCnM5P4dzyT8; Tue, 19 Nov 2019 05:40:55 +0100 (CET) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 11.5 \(3445.9.1\)) From: Carsten Bormann In-Reply-To: <163A8040-9B13-43AA-8917-F75D984B0EBF@tzi.org> Date: Tue, 19 Nov 2019 12:40:52 +0800 Cc: nwcrg@irtf.org X-Mao-Original-Outgoing-Id: 595831251.232051-4d004b256fcd4b606189b7ff0d444140 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message-Id: <26708398-5DEB-478E-8CB8-D406A8B874FF@tzi.org> References: <3D026CEF-AF7D-4CDE-8A5B-8CE5DCF749D1@tzi.org> <163A8040-9B13-43AA-8917-F75D984B0EBF@tzi.org> To: loops@ietf.org X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3445.9.1) Archived-At: Subject: Re: [LOOPS] IETF106: LOOPS side meeting on Tuesday 08:30, Orchard Room X-BeenThere: loops@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: Local Optimizations on Path Segments List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 19 Nov 2019 04:41:03 -0000 > A slide deck is at >=20 > http://tzi.de/~cabo/LOOPS-106-side.pdf Thank you for everyone who joined! 24 people signed the attendee list, but quite a few people wandered in = later. Some highlights of the discussion were: * There was good support in the room for focusing on single = retransmission implementations (which may or may not influence the = actual protocol). For enhancing path segments where that would not = suffice, maybe adding FEC is the approach leading to more timely = repairs. * It is probably worth selecting a small number of example FEC schemes = as something like a recommended basis for benchmarking the protocol = during development. This might include one =E2=80=9Csimple=E2=80=9D = scheme such as SMPTE 2022 style matrix parity, even if we know the areas = of application will be limited. The most powerful schemes are likely to = be patent encumbered in many jurisdictions. Some of these patents may = have run out, though. (A thought that occurs to me after the meeting: = Maybe we should procure an FEC equivalent of RFC 6090?) * Discussing reordering at the different levels it occurs (and = robustness against it may or may not be needed) may require some more = attention. * We probably need to look more closely into how QUIC reacts to = congestion signals. Please chime in if I overlooked something worthy to highlight. In any = case, I will use Yizhou=E2=80=99s note-taking (thank you!) and my audio = recording to produce more detailed minutes after the IETF meeting has = ended. I=E2=80=99m CCing NWCRG as we have a short slot on their agenda on = Thursday. Gr=C3=BC=C3=9Fe, Carsten