Mališa Vučinić <[email protected]> wrote:
    > This text should end up in the next version of the MSF draft, as it is
    > the scheduling function that triggers 6P to add/delete cells. We added
    > some text on it already for the security considerations, what remains
    > to be done is to align the MSF algorithm with the requirement of not
    > adapting to tagged traffic.

I think that Mirja wanted a pointer to this.
I thought that it was in the architecture as well, but I couldn't find it.
I hope that an informative reference is enough so that we aren't delayed.

    >> On 5 Dec 2019, at 15:47, Michael Richardson <[email protected]> 
wrote:
    >>
    >>
    >> Mirja Kuehlewind <[email protected]> wrote:
    >>>>> I would think it
    >>>>> either sets it to AF43 or it does nothing about it because DSCP is not
    >>>>> really used in that network.
    >>>>
    >>>> In 6tisch networks, different DSCP points can be used to get different
    >>>> behaviours, see .... UHM. Let me get back to you on this, because the
    >>>> reference has evaporated.
    >>
    >>> A reference would be good (in the draft) :-)
    >>
    >> Hi, we had a long discussion about setting DSCP points on upward and 
downward
    >> traffic.   We had said that these code point would *not* cause 6P to add 
bandwidth.
    >> Where did we say that?   I feel like that the reference has gone away.
    >>
    >> --
    >> Michael Richardson <[email protected]>, Sandelman Software Works
    >> -= IPv6 IoT consulting =-
    >>
    >>
    >>


--
Michael Richardson <[email protected]>, Sandelman Software Works
 -= IPv6 IoT consulting =-



Attachment: signature.asc
Description: PGP signature

_______________________________________________
6tisch mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/6tisch

Reply via email to