Dear all, We've posted an update of draft-kuhn-aqm-eval-guidelines. It's a minor update:
- a couple of nits fixed, - title changed from "evaluation guidelines" to "characterisation guidelines" as suggested by Fred Baker, - tries to separate more clearly AQM from scheduling, - changes on the ECN-related text (it now points to draft-ietf-aqm-recommendation). Feedback welcome. Thanks, David Begin forwarded message: > From: [email protected] > Subject: New Version Notification for draft-kuhn-aqm-eval-guidelines-02.txt > Date: 11 Aug 2014 11:33:58 GMT+2 > To: Nicolas Kuhn <[email protected]>, "David Ros" > <[email protected]>, David Ros <[email protected]>, "Preethi Natarajan" > <[email protected]>, "Naeem Khademi" <[email protected]>, "Nicolas Kuhn" > <[email protected]>, Preethi Natarajan <[email protected]>, > Naeem Khademi <[email protected]> > > > A new version of I-D, draft-kuhn-aqm-eval-guidelines-02.txt > has been successfully submitted by David Ros and posted to the > IETF repository. > > Name: draft-kuhn-aqm-eval-guidelines > Revision: 02 > Title: AQM Characterization Guidelines > Document date: 2014-08-11 > Group: Individual Submission > Pages: 23 > URL: > http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-kuhn-aqm-eval-guidelines-02.txt > Status: > https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-kuhn-aqm-eval-guidelines/ > Htmlized: http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-kuhn-aqm-eval-guidelines-02 > Diff: > http://www.ietf.org/rfcdiff?url2=draft-kuhn-aqm-eval-guidelines-02 > > Abstract: > Unmanaged large buffers in today's networks have given rise to a slew > of performance issues. These performance issues can be addressed by > some form of Active Queue Management (AQM), optionally in combination > with a packet scheduling scheme such as fair queuing. The IETF AQM > and packet scheduling working group was formed to standardize AQM > schemes that are robust, easily implemented, and successfully > deployed in today's networks. This document describes various > criteria for performing precautionary characterizations of AQM > proposals. This document also helps in ascertaining whether any > given AQM proposal should be taken up for standardization by the AQM > WG. > > > > > 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
