Jonathan and AQM list,

As promised, here's the new draft with a comparison of competing identifiers in Appendix A, ending with a summary table. The body of the draft is very short - a couple of pages solely to define the chosen identifier.

It's got tsvwg in the filename, not AQM, because the transport services (tsv) wg owns maintenance of the ECN (and Diffserv) standards.


Bob


-------- Forwarded Message --------
Subject: New Version Notification for draft-briscoe-tsvwg-ecn-l4s-id-00.txt
Date:   Mon, 19 Oct 2015 16:06:40 -0700
From:   [email protected]
To: Koen De Schepper <[email protected]>, Ing-jyh Tsang <[email protected]>, Bob Briscoe <[email protected]>, [email protected] <[email protected]>



A new version of I-D, draft-briscoe-tsvwg-ecn-l4s-id-00.txt
has been successfully submitted by Bob Briscoe and posted to the
IETF repository.

Name:           draft-briscoe-tsvwg-ecn-l4s-id
Revision:       00
Title:          Identifying Modified Explicit Congestion Notification (ECN) 
Semantics for Ultra-Low Queuing Delay
Document date:  2015-10-19
Group:          Individual Submission
Pages:          22
URL:            
https://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-briscoe-tsvwg-ecn-l4s-id-00.txt
Status:         https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-briscoe-tsvwg-ecn-l4s-id/
Htmlized:       https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-briscoe-tsvwg-ecn-l4s-id-00


Abstract:
   This specification defines the identifier to be used on IP packets
   for a new network service called low latency, low loss and scalable
   throughput (L4S).  It is similar to the original (or 'Classic')
   Explicit Congestion Notification (ECN).  'Classic' ECN marking was
   required to be equivalent to a drop, both when applied in the network
   and when responded to by a transport.  Unlike 'Classic' ECN marking,
   the network applies the L4S identifier more immediately and more
   aggressively than drop, and the transport response to each mark is
   reduced and smoothed relative to that for drop.  The two changes
   counterbalance each other so that the bit-rate of an L4S flow will be
   roughly the same as a 'Classic' flow under the same conditions.
   However, the much more frequent control signals and the finer
   responses to them result in ultra-low queuing delay without
   compromising link utilization, even during high load.  Examples of
   new active queue management (AQM) marking algorithms and examples of
   new transports (whether TCP-like or real-time) are specified
   separately.  The new L4S identifier is the key piece that enables
   them to interwork and distinguishes them from 'Classic' traffic.  It
   gives an incremental migration path so that existing 'Classic' TCP
   traffic will be no worse off, but it can be prevented from degrading
   the ultra-low delay and loss of the new scalable transports.


Please note that it may take a couple of minutes from the time of submission
until the htmlized version and diff are available at tools.ietf.org.

The IETF Secretariat



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

Reply via email to