Thanks. Gorry, Matt Mathis also said he would be putting together some notes.
On Dec 5, 2013, at 10:13 AM, Bob Briscoe <[email protected]> wrote: > Fred, Gorry, all, > > I promised to suggest text for draft-ietf-aqm-recommendation about allowing > the AQM's behaviour to be independent for ECN and non-ECN packets. In the > process, I realised we can't talk about independent AQMs for ECN without also > including Diffserv. > > This gets messy, because I believe a good AQM for BE traffic with and without > ECN, should remove much if not all the need for Diffserv. But we can't ignore > Diffserv. > > _________________________________________________________________________________________ > {In Section 4: add another bullet between recommendations 2 & 3:} > > 3{New}. It SHOULD be possible to make different instances of an AQM algorithm > apply to different subsets of packets that share the same queue. It SHOULD be > possible to classify packets into these subsets at least by ECN codepoint > [RFC3168] and Diffserv codepoint [RFC2474] (or the equivalent of these fields > at lower layers). > > {Then a new section to expand on this before the current Section 4.3.} > 4.3{New}. Independent AQM Instances for ECN and Diffserv > > The recommendation to provide a separate instance of the AQM for ECN packets > goes beyond the assumptions of RFC 3168, which assumed that only one instance > of an AQM will handle both ECN-capable and non-ECN-capable packets. > > > > Bob > > > > ________________________________________________________________ > Bob Briscoe, BT ------------------------------------------------------ 8 issues in virtual infrastructure http://dcrocker.net/#fallacies
signature.asc
Description: Message signed with OpenPGP using GPGMail
_______________________________________________ aqm mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/aqm
