On Wed, 4 Apr 2018, Rao Shoaib wrote:
On 04/03/2018 06:20 PM, Mat Martineau wrote:
> Hi Rao,
> On Mon, 2 Apr 2018, Rao Shoaib wrote:
>> Hi Mat,
>> We have an implementation that implements MPTCP with much much less
>> intrusiveness than the current implementation. It's review has not
>> revealed any serious issues. If it's interaction with TCP can be improved
>> further that is great and patches should be submitted.
>> I have yet to see any other proposal that would result in any better
>> implementation and contrary to individual belief's that some folks have,
>> no one knows what upstream will accept. I bet even David Miller and Eric
>> do not know what they will accept. That is why they asked for an
>> implementation to start a discussion, which we have now.
>> There is no reason to keep working in the dark. Once we have the
>> discussion there will be ample opportunity to improve the implementation
>> based on some guideline.
> I do see what you're saying about not knowing with total certainty what the
> maintainers will say until they say it, and I also think there are benefits
> to be had from our smaller MPTCP upstreaming community in helping each
> other shape a proposal.
> I think the call on Thursday will be a great opportunity to discuss the
> current proposals and patch sets. The real-time discussions there have been
> very helpful - without the latency of email I think we can more quickly
> understand where there is consensus.
Sorry I can not make it to the call -- I have been asked to attend a meeting
at the same time. I know that this is disruptive to everyone but it is beyond
my control. We can instead meet on Friday or Monday or wait till the next
Sorry for the inconvenience.
No problem, given the complexity of group scheduling and time zones I
think the April 12th call is the straightforward solution.