Please see inline. Thanks,
Rong > > > >---------------------------------------------------------------------- >COMMENT: >---------------------------------------------------------------------- > >- Support Ben's comment: > >It would be nice to see some text about the nature of the "experiment". >That is, why is this experimental? Do you expect to promote this to a >standard in the future? (The shepherd's report speaks of this; the draft > >should, too) > >ex: https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc6614#section-1.3 Waiting for Chair¹s comments... > >- Minor personal preference: delay variation instead of jitter. >See https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc5481#section-1 for a justification. >Btw, same comment for draft-ietf-aqm-eval-guidelines-11, which I forgot >to mention. > >- Section 1 >RFC2309 is obsolete: > > RFC 2309[RFC2309] > strongly recommends the adoption of AQM schemes in the network to > improve the performance of the Internet. > >Not sure why [RFC2309] is different than [IETF-AQM], which is now >RFC7567. So maybe using [RFC2309] was used on purpose. RFC2309 is mentioned as it highly recommends AQM like RED, which is why RED has found wide-adoption. It is mentioned to indicate the history of AQM designs. Changed IETF-AQM to RFC7567. > > >- it seems that you sometimes interchange queueing latency, latency, >delay, queue delay >For an example, review section 3 and section 4 first paragraph. >You should really use consistent terms, for example queueing latency, >throughout the document. > >OLD: > >As illustrated in Fig. 1, PIE conceptually comprises three simple MUST >components: a) random dropping at enqueueing; b) periodic drop >probability update; c) latency calculation. When a packet arrives, a >random decision is made regarding whether to drop the packet. The drop >probability is updated periodically based on how far the current delay >is away from the target and whether the queueing delay is currently >trending up or down. The queueing delay can be obtained using direct >measurements or using estimations calculated from the queue length and >the dequeue rate. > >NEW: >As illustrated in Fig. 1, PIE conceptually comprises three simple MUST >components: a) random dropping at enqueueing; b) periodic drop >probability update; c) queueing latency calculation. When a packet >arrives, a >random decision is made regarding whether to drop the packet. The drop >probability is updated periodically based on how far the current queueing >latency >is away from the target and whether the queueing latency is currently >trending up or down. The queueing latency can be obtained using direct >measurements or using estimations calculated from the queue length and >the dequeue rate. > > >NEW: > > Random Drop > / -------------- > -------/ --------------> | | | | | --------------> > /|\ | | | | | > | -------------- > | Queue Buffer \ > | | \ > | |queue \ > | |length \ > | | \ > | \|/ \/ > | ----------------- ------------------- > | | Drop | | Queueing | > -----<-----| Probability |<---| Latency | > | Calculation | | Calculation | > ----------------- ------------------- > Done. > > >- terminology: dequeue_rate or departure? > Section 4.2 =>"dequeue rate" > Section 4.3 > > current_qdelay = queue_.byte_length()/dequeue_rate; > > Section 5.2 Departure Rate Estimation > Section 5.2 typo "Upon a packet deque:" (this one could fine if you >speak about the > >deque(Packet packet) function, but that's not clear) >Again, be consistent across the entire doc. I have changed departure to dequeue to be clear. > >- editorial: missing reference links > > CBQ has been a standard feature in most network devices today[CBQ] > > The controller parameters, alpha and beta(in the unit of hz) are > designed using feedback loop analysis where TCP's behaviors are >modeled > using the results from well-studied prior art[TCP-Models]. These are in? [CBQ] Cisco White Paper, "http://www.cisco.com/en/US/docs/12_0t/12_0tfeature/guide/cbwfq.html";. [TCP-Models] Misra, V., Gong, W., and Towsley, D., "Fluid-base Analysis of a Network of AQM Routers Supporting TCP Flows with an Application to RED", SIGCOMM 2000 Maybe because of special control characters (that I need to fix), they don¹t show up? I will look into these. > > >- editorial: > > This draft separates the PIE design into the basic elements that are > MUST to be implemented and optional SHOULD/MAY enhancement elements. > >NEW: > This draft separates the PIE design into the basic elements that > MUST to be implemented and optional SHOULD/MAY enhancement elements. > > Done. > _______________________________________________ aqm mailing list aqm@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/aqm
