The IESG has approved the following document:
- 'AQM Characterization Guidelines'
(draft-ietf-aqm-eval-guidelines-13.txt) as Informational RFC
This document is the product of the Active Queue Management and Packet
Scheduling Working Group.
The IESG contact persons are Mirja Kühlewind and
All,
We have pushed an updated version that integrates the suggested changes.
Thanks,
Nico
-Message d'origine-
De : aqm [mailto:aqm-boun...@ietf.org] De la part de Mirja Kuehlewind (IETF)
Envoyé : mardi 14 juin 2016 09:13
À : Benoit Claise
Cc : MORTON, ALFRED C (AL);
-Message d'origine-
De : Benoit Claise [mailto:bcla...@cisco.com]
Envoyé : mardi 14 juin 2016 08:53
À : The IESG
Cc : draft-ietf-aqm-eval-guideli...@ietf.org; w...@mti-systems.com;
aqm-cha...@ietf.org; w...@mti-systems.com; aqm@ietf.org
Objet : Benoit Claise's No Objection on
Greg,
We wanted to keep some weight on the requirements behind each scenario.
Since the draft is informational, in the next version, we will remove the
normative language and specify that the relevance of the requirements for each
scenario depends on the deployment scenario.
Regards,
Nico
De
Yes, already contacted the authors!
Thanks all!
> Am 14.06.2016 um 08:42 schrieb Benoit Claise :
>
>
>>> -Original Message-
>>> From: Mirja Kühlewind [mailto:mirja.kuehlew...@tik.ee.ethz.ch]
>>> Sent: Monday, June 13, 2016 3:41 PM
>> ...
>>> Hi Al,
>>>
>>> I
Benoit Claise has entered the following ballot position for
draft-ietf-aqm-eval-guidelines-12: No Objection
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
-Original Message-
From: Mirja Kühlewind [mailto:mirja.kuehlew...@tik.ee.ethz.ch]
Sent: Monday, June 13, 2016 3:41 PM
...
Hi Al,
I believe, we agree here. However, I’m not really sure what needs to be
changed/added in the draft now. The only concrete item I have is
replacing
> -Original Message-
> From: Mirja Kühlewind [mailto:mirja.kuehlew...@tik.ee.ethz.ch]
> Sent: Monday, June 13, 2016 3:41 PM
...
> Hi Al,
>
> I believe, we agree here. However, I’m not really sure what needs to be
> changed/added in the draft now. The only concrete item I have is
>