> On 25 Nov 2021, at 14:57, Dave Taht <[email protected]> wrote: > > On Thu, Nov 25, 2021 at 6:46 AM Tim Chown <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> It’s in 4.4 (routers and L3 switches). Does it need to be in 4.1, Hosts? > > I'd like it to be available everywhere. :)
Well, perhaps the first step here is the mention of AQM for L3 switches and routers. It sounds like CPEs too, before hosts. Tim > fq_codel is already pretty universal in linux hosts. sch_fq is better > for a solely tcp-serving workloads where it can apply pacing more > directly, but what a "host" is, post kubernetes, post network > namespaces, with vms, with tunnels, vpns, with quic, etc, looks a lot > more like a router. > > There's a debate here - with 27 8x10 glossy pictures with circles and > arrows and a paragraph on the back of each one - making that point, > for a "host" - over here: > > https://github.com/systemd/systemd/issues/9725#issuecomment-413369212 > >> >> Tim >> >>> On 25 Nov 2021, at 14:43, Dave Taht <[email protected]> wrote: >>> >>> yes please. >>> >>> On Thu, Nov 25, 2021 at 3:36 AM Tim Chown <[email protected]> wrote: >>>> >>>>> On 23 Nov 2021, at 16:41, Dave Taht <[email protected]> wrote: >>>>> >>>>> On Tue, Nov 23, 2021 at 8:31 AM Tim Chown <[email protected]> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>> Hi Dave, >>>>>> >>>>>>> On 23 Nov 2021, at 16:09, Dave Taht <[email protected]> wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>> It is perhaps selfish of me to really want active queue management, of >>>>>>> some form, as part of specifications for new equipment. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/rfc7567/ >>>>>> >>>>>> I would agree, but this doc is IPv6 requirements, while the RFC is >>>>>> generally applicable to v4 or v6? >>>>> >>>>> It's an and, not an or. >>>>> >>>>> Additionally useful treatments of the ipv6 flow header, and the >>>>> diffserv & ecn bits, the ability to shape or police traffic, would be >>>>> nice to have in a document that talks to the properties of switches >>>>> and routers. >>>> >>>> So we could for example in Section 4 in Optional at least add >>>> >>>> • Active Queue Management support [RFC7567] >>>> >>>> ? >>>> >>>> (Where AF and EF are listed for QoS) >>>> >>>> Tim >>>> >>>>> >>>>>> Tim >>>>>>> >>>>>>> On Tue, Nov 23, 2021 at 7:38 AM Tim Chown via ipv6-wg >>>>>>> <[email protected]> wrote: >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Hi Eric, >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Many thanks for your comments, we’ve updated the ‘living draft’ at >>>>>>>> https://docs.google.com/document/d/10HsfHDOIhUPIvGk9WP0azJiIsMVzQ49RsqWfnbNtceI/edit# >>>>>>>> And attached as PDF. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> In-line... >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> On 5 Nov 2021, at 07:52, Eric Vyncke (evyncke) <[email protected]> >>>>>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Tim*2, Sander, Jan, and Merike, >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> First of all, thank you for taking the pen to update this document. >>>>>>>>> As you kindly asked for comments, here are some >>>>>>>>> - page 2: 'fairly recent' won't age well ;-) >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Removed. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> - page 4: all requirements are limited to performance, but should it >>>>>>>>> also include telemetry/monitoring ? Or is it implicit in the list of >>>>>>>>> RFC ? >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Agreed - we added mention of capabilities in a couple of places. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> - page 4: what about systems to handle VMs and containers ? >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Out of scope. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> - page 4: mobile devices have a *big difference* with normal host >>>>>>>>> though as they often have multiple interfaces active at the same time. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> True, but out of scope. The document is about their connectivity to >>>>>>>> the enterprise infrastructure. We could note this, but currently do >>>>>>>> not. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> - page 4: should we assume that Wi-Fi access points are 'normal >>>>>>>>> layer-2 switches' ? >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Added text to say consider as L2 consumer switch, see Section 3.1. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> - page 6: I am surprised to see RFC 8415 DHCPv6 client as mandatory… >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Fair comment, as this could be something contentious. The only way we >>>>>>>> can think to avoid that is to include the DHCPv6 requirements >>>>>>>> conditionally, ie. “IF you need DHCPv6 then…” those requirements are >>>>>>>> required. So networks deploying with just RA for address >>>>>>>> configuration can avoid that. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> - page 6: if not mistaken RFC 8200 now includes RFC 5722 and RFC 8021 >>>>>>>>> (so no need to add the latter in the requirements) >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Deleted 5722 and 8021. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> - page 7: same surprise to see all DHCP-related requirements >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Also made into an “If DHCPv6 is needed then” >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> - page 7 and other: nice to list some MIB but I would expect some >>>>>>>>> YANG modules as well for enterprise/ISP devices >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> RFC8504 covers this in16.2, should we say the same words here, as >>>>>>>> optional in each section? >>>>>>>> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/rfc8504#section-16.2 >>>>>>>> Thoughts? >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> - page 9: should Jen's RFC 9131 be added as optional ? >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Can do, in which sections? Presumably 4.1 and 4.4? >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Best wishes, >>>>>>>> Tim >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> To unsubscribe from this mailing list, get a password reminder, or >>>>>>>> change your subscription options, please visit: >>>>>>>> https://lists.ripe.net/mailman/listinfo/ipv6-wg >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> -- >>>>>>> I tried to build a better future, a few times: >>>>>>> https://wayforward.archive.org/?site=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.icei.org >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Dave Täht CEO, TekLibre, LLC >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> -- >>>>> I tried to build a better future, a few times: >>>>> https://wayforward.archive.org/?site=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.icei.org >>>>> >>>>> Dave Täht CEO, TekLibre, LLC >>>> >>> >>> >>> -- >>> I tried to build a better future, a few times: >>> https://wayforward.archive.org/?site=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.icei.org >>> >>> Dave Täht CEO, TekLibre, LLC >> > > > -- > I tried to build a better future, a few times: > https://wayforward.archive.org/?site=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.icei.org > > Dave Täht CEO, TekLibre, LLC To unsubscribe from this mailing list, get a password reminder, or change your subscription options, please visit: https://lists.ripe.net/mailman/listinfo/ipv6-wg
