Subject: [tcpm] middlebox discovery option number

From: "Eddy, Wesley M. (GRC-MS00)[ASRC AEROSPACE CORP]" <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 21 Jan 2010 11:54:00 -0600

It appears as a result of the poll to adopt the middlebox
discovery document (draft-knutsen-tcpm-middlebox-discovery-03)
as a TCPM working group item, that there was not significant
enough WG support to adopt this.

There are two ways to obtain a TCP option number described in
RFC 2780 - either IESG approval or Standards Action.  Since
Standards Action is off the table, IESG approval is the route
left.  I believe our ADs may be open to this, as there are
plenty of options numbers left open.  I would like to ask
the working group to consider whether we might have TCPM
consensus to:

(1) leave this up to the IESG to approve or not

(2) actively ask the IESG to _block_ the assignment

(3) actively ask the IESG to _approve_ the assignment, although
    it should not be viewed as setting a precedent for how to
    get options numbers

Lacking any inputs (or consensus in the WG), the default is
for (1).  Since this document/TCP-option has already been
discussed quite a bit in the WG, I think it's reasonable to
ask for responses by 1/29 in order to not keep our ADs waiting
in suspense.

My personal inclination is towards (3), which is given here
outside the WG co-chair role.

--
Wes Eddy
MTI Systems