Hi Mirja, Thanks for the information. I completely agree that it is up to the authors, shepherd & WG Chairs as to what clarity to add.
On the standards track not being required due to not needing interoperability with at the same time not enough deployment, I do think that having a clear statement would help encourage that deployment. Otherwise, it's a catch-22. I also don't know if codel or fq-codel is actually preferable and the reasoning - but I haven't gone and reread the latter. For this work, where the deployment has real hardware (ASIC, etc) consequences with long lead-times, being clearer would help. It's nice to see this work moving ahead. Regards, Alia On Thu, Apr 13, 2017 at 6:34 AM, Mirja Kuehlewind (IETF) < i...@kuehlewind.net> wrote: > Hi Alia, > > thanks for your feedback! Just on your first point regarding the status. > The working group felt that there was not enough deployment to go directly > to standards track and given AQM algorithm don’t need interoperability it > was not really important for them to go to standards track right away. > However, I leave it to the authors if they are able to add more text on how > experimentation should be further performed. > > Mirja > > > > > Am 13.04.2017 um 07:28 schrieb Alia Atlas <akat...@gmail.com>: > > > > Alia Atlas has entered the following ballot position for > > draft-ietf-aqm-codel-07: Yes > > > > When responding, please keep the subject line intact and reply to all > > email addresses included in the To and CC lines. (Feel free to cut this > > introductory paragraph, however.) > > > > > > Please refer to https://www.ietf.org/iesg/statement/discuss-criteria. > html > > for more information about IESG DISCUSS and COMMENT positions. > > > > > > The document, along with other ballot positions, can be found here: > > https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-aqm-codel/ > > > > > > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > > COMMENT: > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > > > > Thank you for a clear and very well written document. This was well > > worth staying up > > past 1am to read fully. I do have one primary comment and a couple minor > > points. > > > > First, the document status is Experimental. While encouraging > > experimentation, the > > document doesn't really articulate what the concerns are or how > > experimentation might > > determine that this should be changed to standards track. While > > regrettably I haven't > > personally followed the AQM work, I might assume that some of the issues > > to general > > applicability might be tied to aspects around the challenges of applying > > CoDel to a > > system architecture built around WRED AQM and enqueue complexity rather > > than dequeue > > complexity. Having a paragraph that gave context in the introduction for > > the questions > > still to be explored would be helpful. > > > > a) In Sec 3.4 : "This property of CoDel has been exploited in > > fq_codel [FQ-CODEL-ID], which hashes on the packet header fields to > > determine a specific bin, or sub-queue, for each five-tuple flow," > > For the general case of traffic, it would be better to focus on using a > > microflow's > > entropy information - whether that is derived from a 5-tuple, the IPv6 > > flow label, > > an MPLS Entropy label, etc. Tying this specifically to the 5-tuple is > > not ideal. > > Obviously I missed this for draft-ietf-aqm-fq-codel-06 - but even a > > slight rephrasing > > to "for each microflow, identifiable via five-tuple hash, src/dest + IPv6 > > flow label, or > > other entropy information" would encourage better understanding of > > micro-flow identification. > > Of course, this is just a comment - so do with it what you will. > > > > b) (Nit) In Sec 5.1: " We use this insight in the pseudo-code for CoDel > > later in the draft." > > The pseudo-code is actually earlier in the draft. Also > > s/draft/document for publication. > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > aqm mailing list > > aqm@ietf.org > > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/aqm > >
_______________________________________________ aqm mailing list aqm@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/aqm
