Fred, Comments below:
Section 2, pt 2 "Deployed AQM SHOULD use ECN as well as loss, and set thresholds to mark traffic earlier than it is lost." - This is not clear, I agree SHOULD use ECN for ECT traffic, of course. - I'm not sure about threshold question that sets ECN drop before ECN loss - I like the idea for various reasons (I'm not expanding that here), but this isn't what I understand as the current recommended TCP ECN reaction - which reacts to CE in the same way as loss? We need to be careful that we don't suggest not using ECN can gain advantage. Section 2 pt 3 - Again I agree, but not sure we can say this as a BCP requirement? I think we should think about how best to present this. Section 2 pt 4 - Agree and we also now have tunnel technologies considering ECN support, so also these? Section 2 pt 5 - Nice, but not not possible - so TCP without ECN *IS* going to cause loss and delay if it shares the same congested queue. The idea of defining guidance on what to expect here is also good, and maybe a significant step to getting a better understanding. I note that RFC 2309 does recommend RED but importantly it did not motivate it in the way that now makes AQM an imperative. It also largely pre-dated ECN and certainly the experience in ECN implementation. Gorry > Folks. I posted the email I sent yesterday as a draft, for discussion. I > welcome comments, and if substantive comments are made, suggested text. > > > On Mar 13, 2013, at 12:48 PM, <[email protected]> > wrote: > >> >> A new version of I-D, draft-baker-tsvwg-aqm-recommendation-00.txt >> has been successfully submitted by Fred Baker and posted to the >> IETF repository. >> >> Filename: draft-baker-tsvwg-aqm-recommendation >> Revision: 00 >> Title: IETF Recommendations Regarding Active Queue Management >> Creation date: 2013-03-13 >> Group: Individual Submission >> Number of pages: 7 >> URL: >> http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-baker-tsvwg-aqm-recommendation-00.txt >> Status: >> http://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-baker-tsvwg-aqm-recommendation >> Htmlized: >> http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-baker-tsvwg-aqm-recommendation-00 >> >> >> Abstract: >> Fifteen years after the IAB issued its recommendations regarding >> congestion control in RFC 2309, a major issue in the community is the >> issue that RFC addresses: Buffer bloat. It may be time to update the >> recommendation. >> >> >> >> >> The IETF Secretariat >> >
