Subject: [tcpm] Robert Wilton's No Objection on draft-ietf-tcpm-rack-14: (with COMMENT)

From: Robert Wilton via Datatracker <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 17 Dec 2020 02:50:14 -0800

Robert Wilton has entered the following ballot position for
draft-ietf-tcpm-rack-14: No Objection

When responding, please keep the subject line intact and reply to all
email addresses included in the To and CC lines. (Feel free to cut this
introductory paragraph, however.)

Please refer to https://www.ietf.org/iesg/statement/discuss-criteria.html
for more information about IESG DISCUSS and COMMENT positions.

The document, along with other ballot positions, can be found here:
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-tcpm-rack/

----------------------------------------------------------------------
COMMENT:
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Hi,

I didn't manage to review the algorithm in detail (way outside my area), but
surrounding text was clear, understandable and interesting for someone without
TCP expertise, so thank you for that.

One minor NIT would be the change the footer from "RACK" to "RACK-TLP".

Section 9.5 talks about using RACK for other protocols and I wanted to confirm
that it does mean only RACK and not RACK-TLP for this case.

Regards,
Rob

---

From: Yuchung Cheng <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 18 Dec 2020 09:32:20 -0800

> that it does mean only RACK and not RACK-TLP for this case.
Thank you for your review. This is a good catch. QUIC does implement
RACK-TLP not only RACK. We'll revise accordingly

The over-abbreviated footer "RACK" will be removed and replaced by the
RFCxxxx when published.