Re: [aqm] I-D Action: draft-ietf-aqm-recommendation-04.txt

2015-05-24 Thread Simon Barber
OK - so this is within ISP networks. Could this be avoided by mapping the DSCPs on entry and exit of their network? Do you know about CS1 within ISP networks? Or any impact at the edge? Simon On 5/24/2015 11:33 AM, Mikael Abrahamsson wrote: On Sun, 24 May 2015, Simon Barber wrote: My

Re: [aqm] I-D Action: draft-ietf-aqm-recommendation-04.txt

2015-05-24 Thread Simon Barber
Hi Mikael, I can't find reference to DSCP 10 or 000110, where are they defined? I know the title 'assured forwarding' seems to imply better than best effort, but I think this is a mistake for AF1 - which seems to be recommended for bulk traffic that is not latency sensitive. You can't

Re: [aqm] I-D Action: draft-ietf-aqm-recommendation-04.txt

2015-05-24 Thread Mikael Abrahamsson
On Sun, 24 May 2015, Simon Barber wrote: Hi Mikael, I can't find reference to DSCP 10 or 000110, where are they defined? What do you mean? I mapped the drop probability bits to BE and suggested this might be used. I know the title 'assured forwarding' seems to imply better than best

Re: [aqm] AQM hurts utilization with a single TCP stream?

2015-05-24 Thread Simon Barber
Good point. So the queue will be somewhat more full when the first drop happens. The question is will it be full enough to ensure that the cwnd after the drop is detected remains big enough to keep the pipe filled. Some math or experimentation is needed to figure this out. I suspect there will

Re: [aqm] I-D Action: draft-ietf-aqm-recommendation-04.txt

2015-05-24 Thread Simon Barber
I do like the idea of introducting a new 'low priority' code point, were the top 3 bits are 0, so that legacy equipment that makes the wrong interpretation (higher priority) treats the traffic as BE. There is a mess of different interpretations out there, and the downside would be legacy

[aqm] A Diffserv primer

2015-05-24 Thread Jonathan Morton
On 25 May, 2015, at 07:31, Mikael Abrahamsson swm...@swm.pp.se wrote: I don't understand the difference between AF1 and CS1. Please elaborate. On Sun, 24 May 2015, Simon Barber wrote: I can't find reference to DSCP 10 or 000110, where are they defined? It’s important to remember

Re: [aqm] I-D Action: draft-ietf-aqm-recommendation-04.txt

2015-05-24 Thread Fred Baker (fred)
On May 24, 2015, at 11:02 AM, Simon Barber si...@superduper.net wrote: Hi Roland, My recent attention to DSCP has come from looking at what correct mappings to 802.1D (now 802.1Q) would be. I have also run across a couple of comments that legacy IP Precedence maps CS1 - higher priority

Re: [aqm] I-D Action: draft-ietf-aqm-recommendation-04.txt

2015-05-24 Thread Mikael Abrahamsson
On Sun, 24 May 2015, Simon Barber wrote: OK - so this is within ISP networks. Could this be avoided by mapping the DSCPs on entry and exit of their network? Do you know about CS1 within ISP networks? Or any impact at the edge? I don't understand the difference between AF1 and CS1. Please