I agree the focus has been on updating the recommendations section.
I quite understand that you have other things to do, so I'll try and
summarise comments on the earlier sections and see if you agree. When we
have a list we (with AQM chairs) can then decide what to do (work out how
long it will
@ietf.org
Betreff: Re: [aqm] last call results on draft-ietf-aqm-recommendation
Wes,
Thx. In case I don't get time to read, then type, I'll shoot my mouth off
anyway...
Sorry this is a bit rushed and dismissive. That's not my intention - I'm v
supportive of the recommendations that have now
[mailto:aqm-boun...@ietf.org] Im Auftrag von Bob Briscoe
Gesendet: Donnerstag, 15. Mai 2014 16:32
An: Wesley Eddy; Fred Baker; Gorry Fairhurst
Cc: aqm@ietf.org
Betreff: Re: [aqm] last call results on draft-ietf-aqm-recommendation
Wes,
Thx. In case I don't get time to read, then type, I'll shoot my
On 5/15/2014 5:09 AM, Bob Briscoe wrote:
Wes,
I assume you also want comments on the new version. Is there a deadline
for comments?
Absolutely, yes. There's no deadline at the moment, but it would
be good to get any out sooner rather than later, especially if they're
likely to need more
Gorry,
At 16:55 15/05/2014, go...@erg.abdn.ac.uk wrote:
Great, I look forward to comments on the actual text. I agree the front
part needs more structure and more topics called out. i started adding
that in -04 and would be pleased to add a few more subsections if we get
agreement.
I'll wait
Gorry,
And just on this...
a) Congestion collapse: An AQM cannot prevent congestion collapse -
that is the job of congestion control and, failing that, of policing.
Even isolation (e.g. flow separation) doesn't prevent congestion
collapse, because collapse is caused by the load from new
I agree with the complement language. I don't mind if they are separable.
Integration, however, is highly advantagous.
I started another thread on the backlog issue.
Because scheduling requires policy and AQM doesn't.
Machine gunning down packets randomly until the flows start to behave
Hello AQMers, the WG last call on the 2309bis / AQM
recommendation draft has turned up a couple of reviews that
said the document isn't quite ready. I think some of the
comments could be resolved relatively easily with an update,
though others might take some discussion to converge on what
really
