Richard, Wes,
1) The AQM charter says:
"Dec 2014 - Submit first algorithm specification to IESG for
publication as Proposed Standard"
I volunteered to do a thorough review of the PIE draft, which I'm
just writing up. One of the problems is that it says 'Proposed
Standard' at the top, but it's written in an informational style.
There is no normative language saying what a PIE implementation MUST
do, what it SHOULD do and what it MAY do.
And actually, I'm not convinced that it would be worthwhile to add
normative language. On reflection, I believe it would be better left
as an informative specification of the PIE algorithm and its possible
variants.
I'm not religious about this. Normative language might be useful. But
on a pragmatic note, it will take considerable time and argument to
decide which aspects are the essence of PIE and which are optional,
because we will then have to consider whether certain combinations of
options are not workable, or whether taking out too many of the
optional parts makes it non-viable.
What will be the point of being able to say that a particular
implementation complies with an RFC that recorded at one snapshot in
time what we thought defined the line between PIE and not PIE? If a
future improvement is not described in the RFC, it will be
non-compliant but better.
BTW, wrt the CoDel draft, it does contain some normative language.,
but there are many aspects of the spec where it is not stated whether
they are MUST, SHOULD or MAY. So this email really applies to both specs.
2) There /are/ interoperability concerns between AQMs, and between
delay-based congestion controls (like LEDBAT) and AQMs. Writing a
Proposed Standard giving the interoperability constraints on all AQMs
would be a useful exercise. However, giving the special status of
proposed standard to one design of PIE at one snapshot in time will
not say anything about interoperability.
3) If someone comes up with an improvement on PIE (or CoDel) next
week or next month or next year, will the IETF want to standardise
it? Is the intention that AQM-chair will be a job for life?
Bob
________________________________________________________________
Bob Briscoe, BT
_______________________________________________
aqm mailing list
aqm@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/aqm
