Nicolas et al,
Few minor comments and suggestions on draft-ietf-tsvwg-rtcweb-qos-04.txt -
1. We should require all tests to be first conducted with AQM disabled.
This will provide a good reference point for comparison and also help
to verify that
test network and traffic configurations are consistent across different
test groups.
2. In tests, where network parameters are changed dynamically (e.g., link
capacity, congestion level),
it would be useful to capture and compare metrics during the first few
seconds after the change.
To evaluate how quickly and gracefully the algorithms respond to such
changes.
3. Would be useful to add to the metrics list - the number of packets
dropped due to tail-drop.
4. We should add link rates of 1 Gbps and 10 Gbps.
5. In the traffic mix test in section 8.1, it would be useful to test with
a large number of users,
as specified in section 7.2.4, especially for web traffic.
6. Should we require that AQM algorithm parameter settings be identical
across all tests?
Or at least be a small set of profiles?
7. It's not clear how FQ-AQM should be handled. Section 13.3 seems to punt
on the issue.
An AQM algorithm with FQ will exhibit quite different results compared
to one without FQ.
Should one compare a test scenario with AQM and a single queue vs one
with FQ-AQM?
My apologies if some of these suggestions have been discussed and disposed of
before.
In which case, please ignore them.
Regards,
Anil
_______________________________________________
aqm mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/aqm
