I'm not the author, so nothing to see here. :-) I was not considering David's line of thinking about future mandatory application aware uses: rather, I was speculating about how ENO could make use of SYN data in general, which immediately led to the question in my OP about TCP's actual (normative and observed) semantics regarding SYN data in the absence of TFO.
The thread has split, and I'm happy to let David represent his intentions. Kyle On Jul 30, 2016 7:33 PM, "Jeremy Harris" <[email protected]> wrote: > On 30/07/16 18:20, David Mazieres wrote: > > No one is suggesting sending data in a SYN segment to a server that does > > not support ENO. In fact, no one is even suggesting sending data in a > > SYN segment. > > I'm confused. Kyle was talking about it: > > On 29/07/16 20:41, Kyle Rose wrote: > > Right, I get that for interoperability with ENO-unaware stacks there is > no > > way to change data presented in the SYN. > [...] > > (1) If it is negotiating ENO, it will hand the data off to the chosen > TEP, > > which will then indicate back to ENO whether to ACK the data or not. > > -- > Jeremy > > _______________________________________________ > Tcpinc mailing list > [email protected] > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tcpinc >
_______________________________________________ Tcpinc mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tcpinc
