Thanks Wesley.
fq_codel Internet draft- v4 addresses the question I raised and the text is 
clear now. Also, I implemented fq_codel in FreeBSD based on the fq_codel 
Internet draft- v04 and I got reasonable results.

Regards,
Rasool Al-Saadi

> -----Original Message-----
> From: aqm [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Wesley Eddy
> Sent: Friday, 5 February 2016 1:30 AM
> To: [email protected]
> Subject: [aqm] status of WGLC on fq-codel
> 
> Hello, we started a working group last call for comments on this draft in
> December:
> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-aqm-fq-codel/
> (this is the -03 version currently)
> 
> Some comments were received since then, and Toke updated the
> document:
> https://kau.toke.dk/ietf/draft-ietf-aqm-fq-codel-04.html
> (draft -04 version)
> 
> I think this update addresses all of the comments received.
> 
> I didn't see any feedback about document publication tracks (e.g. Standards
> Track, Informational, Experimental, etc).  We talked to the ADs briefly about
> this, and I think we are comfortable with Experimental for this document.
> That is the appropriate track if the AQM working group thinks this is safe to
> deploy widely while experimenting with on the Internet (which I think is
> consistent with what section 7 describes -- it has already been widely
> deployed, though there are some items identified for future enquiry).  So, I
> think version -04 should be labelled with "Intended Status: Experimental".
> 
> My plan is to complete the shepherd writeup for this document in the next
> couple weeks, and if the editors push the -04 version of the draft, I think it
> will be ready to proceed for AD review.
> 
> Please shout if you have further comments.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> aqm mailing list
> [email protected]
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/aqm

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

Reply via email to