Thank you Nicolas, and of course also all the other editors for preparing this document!
We will dedicate a significant fraction of the meeting time in London on discussing this document, so I would like to encourage you all to review this version! Best regards, Richard Scheffenegger > -----Original Message----- > From: Nicolas KUHN [mailto:[email protected]] > Sent: Freitag, 07. Februar 2014 12:58 > To: Scheffenegger, Richard > Cc: [email protected] > Subject: [AQM Evaluation Guidelines] > > Dear all, > > On the behalf of the contributors to the AQM Evaluation Guidelines, I > encourage active discussion on the draft that we have written. > I just submitted the draft as an individual draft to the I-D Submission > Tool [0]. > > Please let us know what you think of the current document. > > Kind regards, > > Nicolas KUHN > > [0] http://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-kuhn-aqm-eval-guidelines/ > > > On Feb 5, 2014, at 10:01 PM, "Scheffenegger, Richard" <[email protected]> > wrote: > > > Hi, > > > > a new month, a new status report. > > > > First of all, Wes and I as chairs would like to thank the editors who > have stepped forward to work on the AQM Evaluation Guideline draft. We are > really thankful for their burst of efforts in the last couple weeks! > > > > We expect that that a document will be ready for submission into the I-D > repository well before cutoff, as an individual draft, so that the WG can > see what the state of thinking is currently. Also, once the document is > published on datatracker we'd like to encourage active discussion on it. > > > > If the submitted -00 draft is felt to have a fairly complete outline of > what the current thinking in the WG is, we may be able to ask the WG for > formal adoption during this IETF meeting, or shortly thereafter. > > > > > > > > > > - WG Milestones: > > - Submit AQM recommendations to IESG for publication, obsoleting RFC > > 2309 (Goal: January 2014) > > - draft-ietf-aqm-recommendation is accepted towards this milestone > > - http://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-aqm-recommendation/ > > - the draft has been updated per comments received > > - if the authors are comfortable, a WGLC might be made on the next > > revision > > - we would like to hear from other authors of RFC 2309 on this > > document, if anyone has contacts to them. > > > > > > - Submit AQM algorithm evaluation guidelines to IESG for publication > > as Informational (Goal: July 2014) > > - An editor team has come forth and is working on this > > - A draft should be available for discussion in the London IETF > > - We encourage discussion on the list and during the meeting, if > this > > draft should be adopted by the working group. > > > > - Submit first algorithm specification to IESG for publication as > > Proposed Standard (Goal: December 2014) > > - Since any Proposed Standard algorithm should be in line with the > > recommendations and be passable versus the evaluation guidelines, this > > milestone is dependend on the progress of the two work items above. > > - Currently the only algorithm spec with a complete and active > > individual-submission draft is PIE > > > > - Other items: > > - draft-pan-aqm-pie is under active work as a proposed algorithm: > > http://tools.ietf.org/id/draft-pan-aqm-pie-00.txt, however the draft > > has expired and should be refreshed. > > - draft-nichols-tsvwg-codel is expired; Dave Taht or others may > > revive it and/or describe pairing with FQ/SFQ algorithms: > > http://tools.ietf.org/id/draft-nichols-tsvwg-codel-01.txt > > - Other algorithm specifications are welcome! > > - Though, we are not planning on adopting algorithms until > > recommendations and evaluation guidelines are mostly stable > > > > > > Richard Scheffenegger > > > > _______________________________________________ > > aqm mailing list > > [email protected] > > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/aqm _______________________________________________ aqm mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/aqm
